Western liberal democracy would be wrong for China

good evening my name is nari woods and I'm Dean of the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University it gives me particular pleasure to be moderating a debate on the question Western liberal democracy would be wrong for China in establishing a School of Government what's struck me is how much that question is being asked both outside-in and inside-out around the world how many times in the United States and Europe I've been asked if it wouldn't be better to move to a model of authoritarian or benign dictatorship and how many times in China and elsewhere I've been asked searching questions about democracy so this is a truly timely debate you will be casting your vote at the end of the debate for those of you who are coming to this as their first intelligence squared debate you tear your ticket in two and you can cast your bait either for or against depending on which of these fantastic panelists has persuaded you that their side of this argument is right if you just want to sit on the fence you can put your entire ticket on the box in the box but I think that's unsporting so I'd urge you all to to boldly take make your vote I think it's it's also timely that we're having this debate the day after America's election I think in the minds of many of us are questions about whether it's necessarily the case that the skills it takes to win an election are not the skills it takes to govern a country well I think many of us are asking whether it's a good use of half a billion dollars put in by companies to purchase some would say their preferences in government and that likewise the non-democratic systems of the world have their counterpart in the injections of billions perhaps less transparently into control over their leadership I think in both west and east there's a real issue about what is the system which best protects minorities and the very poorest in society we're in one system they might have legal rights which aren't enforced and in the other they don't have the legal rights in the first place so these these are the questions I'm very much hoping our debate will take us to tonight so without further ado I'm going to call on Jiang Weiwei as our first speaker he's senior fellow at the chinkyu Institute author of the China Wave the rise of a civilizational state Shang Weiwei will be known to many of you as the senior translator - Deng Chao ping but perhaps you don't realize that he spent the last twenty four years or he spent 24 years I should say living and working in Europe and when I asked Jiang Weiwei why what was it about Europe that he most liked he said it's the taste for everything old and the architecture so Jiang Weiwei we look forward to your argument for the motion that Western liberal democracy would be wrong for China Thank You professor Woods for your very kind introduction we are living in an extraordinary kind of history yesterday us held its presidential election and tomorrow China will hold its eating's party Congress which were unveiled China's new generation of leaders the Western media tends to present the two events as a sharp contrast between OPEC communist state beset with crises and the transparent dynamic liberal democracy behind this very superficial contrast is a widely held view that Western liberal democracy represents the ultimate best political system or in professor fukuyama's worth the end of history and therefore China is viewed always as a kind of enlarged the Belarus awaiting a color revolution in the transition towards liberal democracy short of that China will be hopeless but this squirrel fort is faced with a mind-boggling question it's forever pessimistic forecasts about China China's collapse tends to be always wrong and after three decades misplaced predictions about China it's time now to think outside the box to consider seriously the scene of our debate today Western liberal democracy would be wrong for China to my mind there are at least five reasons for this argument first common sense with a population larger than we combined the populations of North America Europe Russia Japan and more with no tradition of liberal democracy whatsoever with a fresh memory of the stating breakup of the Soviet Union Russia was only 1/10 of China size in terms of population with long memory of upheavals throughout China's long and modern history and China's fear of upheavals is based on common sense indeed the country may well become uncover nerble if it adopted Western political model China is not an enlarged Belarus China is a civilization of state is the size of roughly every 100 average of European states it's a product of hundreds of states amalgamated into one of its long history an inaccurate analogy would be something like the Asian Roman Empire continuing to this day as unify the modern state with a centralized government modern economy or its diverse traditions and cultures and huge population that all speak Latin to be frank this kind of state cannot Ford one-person one-vote a multi-party system even the European Union of 27 cannot afford this kind of system if the doctors cannot model it were either become useless white elephant or end up in disintegration second empirical evidence China actually experimented liberal democracy after its 1911 Republic Revolution but this experiment turned out to be a devastating catastrophe the country immediately plunged into chaos and civil wars with hundreds of political parties juggling for power with warlords fighting each other each supported by some foreign powers with a shattered economy and millions of lives lost in the decades to come this kind of lesson is so sharp and so fresh in the memory of the Chinese today virtually China you often use the word run they are afraid of blood what did the run mean Johnny means chaos and third performance chan has performed arguably better than most liberal democracies over the past three decades especially in domains of great concern to most Chinese people of course China has its share of problems some very serious but China's overall success is beyond the doubt over the past three decades child had performed better than other developing countries combined in terms of eradicating poverty 70% of world poverty were radically in China over the past 20 years Chan has performed better than all the transition economies combined so China's economy increase 18 fold in the matter of three decades compared with say Eastern Europe roughly one fold Chan has also performed better than many developed the countries China has a large developed region roughly 300 million people the size of the United States which today in many ways can compete with developed countries and the first year cities like Shanghai in this develop the region can and should be able to compete with London or New York fourth the liberal democracy model itself is in deep trouble assume in crisis of the crisis for deeply indebted America to distressed Europe even with Obama's election victory today I don't see any solution to America's projected problems despite some of its known strengths liberal democracy as a institution has been seriously eroded by such a prevailing problems such as short-termism single-minded populism excessive influence of money especially United States one dollar one vote and influence of special interests every her Lincoln's idea of government of the people by the people for the people is hardly achievable among liberal democracies otherwise Joseph Stiglitz Norbury economics Laurie would not have complained he said American polity has become austere 1% by the 1% for the 1% this is why even the advocate of end of history professor Fukuyama said not long ago in the Financial Times op-ed that united states democracy has little to teach China now fifths and my last point the channel model without much fanfare Beijing has actually introduced major reform into its ways of political governance and established a very elaborate system of meritocracy which can be called selection plus election across the whole of China's political structure nothing can better illustrate this meritocracy system than the line up of the next generation of Chinese political leaders to be unveiled in the coming days virtually all the candidate members of China's Standing Committee the highest decision body decision-making body of China have served twice at the number one of the Chinese province as you may know given the size of China each province is often four or five times of the average European states it's by no means it takes extraordinary talent and skill to govern the Chinese state you have to do it twice and perform well before get ticket to end in to top leadership I said with this kind of meritocracy system in place as its case now of course can be further improved or can already guarantee such leaders like George W Bush or japan's Prime Minister Noda we'll have no chance whatsoever to end the top-level leadership it's a way below the Chinese standards to be frank the channel model is more about leadership while the liberal democracy mode seems more about showmanship China is now capable planning for the next generation while the other model planning for next election or next 100 days China's meritocracy system indeed challenges this stereotypical dichotomy of democracy versus autocracy from the Chinese upon our view the nature of the state including its legitimacy has to be defined by its substance that is by good government's with competent leaders and measured by what state can deliver and toward extent people are satisfied despite its deficiencies which could be many the Chinese polity has ensured the world's fastest growing economy over three decades running and ensure the vast improved living standards for most Chinese as reviewed in the most recent PW survey PW Washington based research organization 82% Chinese feel optimistic about the future of their country indeed this status is so good it's way ahead of for the Western liberal democracies Winston Churchill's famous dictum democracy is the worst form of government except for those other forms that have been tried may be true in the Western political culture many Chinese even paraphrase this phrase into what Chinese call a shot or least bad option when chances on political culture in confusion tradition of meritocracy a state should always strive for the best of the best solution and option it's by no means easy but you have to try even you meet half of these standards which is already admirably so at this moment China has succeeded in building up also it's not perfect yet this kind of meritocracy system will combine the best option of selecting well tested leaders and also introduced the least bad option to ensure the actual bad leaders so collective leadership through terms very strict term limit age limit so I think this kind of meritocracy is really a competitive it may win out in this global competition of ideas and good governance and good democracy China has learned so much from the West and will continue to do so for its own benefit but it may be time now to use in helping famous phrase to emancipate the mind and learn a bit on the part of the West to learn bit more about China and you will learn bit from the chinese ideas and practices Arabic strenuous they may appear for its own benefit in conclusion one man's medicine could be another man's poison and Western liberal democracy may be great or less great for the West but would be miserable in wrong for country like China thank you very much for your attention our next speaker speaking against the motion is the former chief secretary of Hong Kong the first woman and the first Chinese to hold this second highest governmental position in Hong Kong Anson Chan is someone who learned her politics at home she and her twin sister and six brothers contending and with a remarkable woman as a mother a mother who was widowed in her mid-30s and raised the eight children as well as carving herself out a career as a famous calligraphy and painter we're lucky to have Anson Chan here today Thank You Anne I like to thank intelligence squared for inviting me to participate in this debate addressing the motion that Western liberal democracy would be bad for China I think the selection of today's date could not be more apt neatly sandwiched between yesterday's u.s. presidential election and tomorrow's opening of the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China that will usher in the next generation of Chinese leadership the contrast between the nail-biting finish of one with the carefully choreographed outcome of the other could hardly be more stark I like to begin by addressing the subtext to the motion namely that the Chinese model of government has done more for the Chinese than the Western model of government ever could this rather presupposes that within this room we share a common understanding of what is meant by the Chinese model of government and the term Western liberal democracy as I doubt this is so permit me to give my perspective 63 years on from the end of the civil war in China the Communist Party still remains firmly in control however the policies of the last 30 years in particular the evolution of capitalism with Chinese characteristics have moved light-years away from the ideologies of the Mao era which thrived on constant social and economic turbo and led amongst other things to the disasters of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution during which millions died the key characteristics of the current Chinese model of government was seemed to me to be an ever-growing bureaucracy intent on preserving at all costs one-party rule recognition that this can only be achieved if the population at large believes the economic benefits being eat outweigh the fact that they have no say in the selection of those who govern them an economy that is still largely command led structured around successive five-year plans supported by huge government investment in state controlled enterprises and infrastructure vigorous suppression of dissent through strict censorship and harassment persecution of any who dare to speak out against the system or its injustice and subordination of the rights of the individual to the wider public interest as determined by the state set against this are what I see as the typical characteristics of a Western liberal democracy recognition of the essential role of political parties as channels for the expression of differing views within society and a basis for oddly change of government from time to time bias towards a predominantly market layer economy in which the government's priorities are to nurture innovation support free enterprise and ensure that the needs of vulnerable sectors of the community are met absolute commitment to the rule of law freedom of thought and expression protection of individual rights and freedoms within a just and fair society there is no doubt that the Chinese model of government however described has delivered extremely impressive economic growth lifting many millions out of poverty and in the meantime greatly enriching some but the speed and scale of China's development is not exactly unprecedented in more democratic societies look at the rise of Great Britain as a global economic power in the second half of the 19th century or the emergence of the United States from the Great Depression of the 1930s to become the most prosperous and powerful nation in the world conversely in the latter part of the 20th century the Soviet Union socialist model of centrally controlled economic development which China initially sought to emulate collapsed unable to fend off demands for political reform from within or compete effectively with a faster growing market driven economies of the West to argue that Western liberal democracy would be bad for China is in my view and insult to the Chinese people it implies that they are somehow not sufficiently grown-up to aspire to electing their own leaders as opposed to having them foisted upon them by means of a highly opaque process of balancing the various factions within the governing elite furthermore anyone who argues that Western liberal democracy would be bad for China must also be prepared to acknowledge the perils that the nation faces if it doesn't begin to take some genuine steps in the direction of political reform all around the world previously unshakeable authoritarian regimes are being challenged and overthrown no wonder China is keeping a nervous eye on developments in North Africa and the Middle East it took the self-immolation of just one persecuted street vendor to trigger revolution in Tunisia in Tibet and siege on the tally of self-immolations has risen to nearly 60 since 200 9 and shows no sign of abating the current Chinese model of government is founded on the belief that as long as the economy keeps growing and standards of living rising stability can be maintained and the population at large will tolerate amongst other things an ever widening wealth gap between the cities and countryside restriction of personal rights and freedoms and the continuing crushing of any form of dissent this strategy in my view is fundamentally flawed the current form of government is under challenge from a rising tide not just of discontent but real anger among sectors of the population that are increasingly disaffected no one knows exactly how many incidents of popular unrest commonly referred to as mass incidents are occurring some estimates put it at a hundred and eighty thousand into old one one whilst others believe that this is just the tip of the iceberg little wonder that China is now spending more on internal security than on the funding of its military popular anger and increasingly bold resistance to government authorities is being fueled by forced land acquisitions arbitrary land grabs by provincial officials often to make way for totally unnecessary development empty high-rises and shopping malls roads to nowhere the collapse of shoddily constructed schools in the 200 AC - an earthquake tainted baby milk and other food safety scandals environmental degradation have led and are leading to unprecedented confrontations between ordinary citizens and the government still all too often instead of acknowledging shortcomings and responding to justified concerns the authority's reaction is to punish the protesters for disturbing social harmony corruption is now arrived at every level of the Chinese political machine power is concentrated in the hands of a privileged clique perhaps no more than 400 families who are bound by a common purpose to protect their mutual vested interests and capacity for self enriching the Communist vision of proletarian supremacy within an egalitarian state has been subsumed by greed and injustice exemplified by the often shameless flaunting by party Carter's of ill-gotten wealth and a culture of impunity from moral and even criminal culpability no one wants to see China go the way of the Soviet Union in the aftermath of desintegration the gains that china has made in the past three decades are far too precious to put at risk in an age when the dissemination of information via the internet and the blogosphere is unstoppable to continue to try and stifle the satisfaction and dissent is about as futile as King Canute's legendary attempt to stop the tide coming in current abuses of power and the pervading lack of transparency and accountability simply will not be tolerated indefinitely everywhere in the world the need for change is the mention rather than waiting for popular unrest to force change China's leaders should now be actively planning for an orderly relaxation of its iron grip on political power and a move towards greater openness and participatory politics my conclusion the central government needs a new model that it can nail its colors too back in the late 1970's and early 1980s hong kong played a crucial role in kick-starting china's economic revolution and the dung shoppings open-door policy special economic zones were established on the border with or in close proximity to hong kong with the express purpose of inducing hong kong industrialists to move their manufacturing operations across the border where land and labour was so much cheaper this marked a start of how southern china Lawford into the factory of the world piggy banking on hong kong investment that provided employment for millions of migrant workers and provided the formula to attract wider foreign investment the hong kong economic model clearly worked and I believe that the Chinese central government can and should look to hong kong to test a new model of more democratic government that could be extended progressively into the mainland thanks to the terms of the sino drawing british drone declaration and the concept of one country two systems' enshrined in our Constitution the basic law Hong Kong people enjoy the fundamental freedoms associated with a modern liberal democracy namely the rule of law and an independent judiciary freedom of expression including freedom of the press freedom of religion freedom from arbitrary arrest and imprisonment zero tolerance of corruption the promise not yet realized of the right to elect our head of government and legislature by means of universal suffrage far from being bad for China it is essential that the coming leadership in Beijing begin to draw up a blueprint for reform that provides Chinese people through a process of evolution not revolution but the fundamental rights and freedoms associated with liberal democratic government there are plenty of studies to confirm the link between rising levels of economic well-being and the openness of the political system a democratically based system of governance will not only sustain China's long-term economic growth but will also enrich Chinese society and the world at large and the perils of not doing so are becoming increasingly acute so ladies and gentlemen I beg to a toast motion before you this evening thank you so our next speaker speaking for the motion is Martin Jakes Martin is author of the book when China rules the world a senior research fellow at the LSE and a visiting professor at Ching hua University in Beijing he tells me his fascination with China began on a holiday in southern China in 1993 where from the sounds of it he fell in love with both a country and a woman at the same time in about 30 seconds he told me Martin I'd liked owed hasten to add it wasn't 15 seconds it was 30 things as it was 15 minutes and it didn't happen in China it happened in Malaysia and my wife-to-be was not Chinese but of Indian descent India Malaysia so apart from a few inaccuracies it was accurately now I want to clarify first of all what this motion is about or what it's not about it's probably the best way of putting it this is not a proposal that liberal western-style democracy will always be inappropriate for China I don't know what the situation is going to be like in 25 years or 50 years I don't even know what the situation is likely to be in the West in that period what we're discussing is something much more specific likewise we're not suggesting or certainly I'm not suggesting and the motion is not suggesting that what happens in China and the arrangements that are appropriate for China in this period should be transplanted into our own societies I would not argue that for a moment in fact on the contrary I would say that the reason Western democracies have grown up in the West has been because of the history and the culture of our societies and we need to pay Jew respect I would suggest to China and the differences of its history and culture in the same way what this motion is about is a country which is a developing country which in the middle of the 20th century was extremely poor which had suffered 200 years during a 200 year period of more or less and I mean this literally economic stagnation its GDP at the end of this period was more or less the same as it was in the first part of the 19th century and it had been invaded and partially colonized by many countries including our own in 1949 China was a mess and a basket case and the task that confronted China was how with vast country could they transform it and they made quite a few false moves and false starts so when dong-chil ping came to power in 1978 he identified the two crucial tasks tasks of China the first was an overwhelming focus on the need for economic growth and secondly intimately tied to that was the need for a huge reduction in poverty in a poverty-stricken country at that time in 1978 the Chinese economy was one twentieth of the size of the American economy and since that move from the end of the 70s in the direction of economic reform we have seen the most remarkable economic transformation in human history a population of 1.3 billion people one-fifth of humanity its economy growing at 10% a year to the point where today the Chinese economy is half the size of the American economy and there's a general view now that the Chinese economy will overtake the American economy in size around about 2018 this is truly remarkable and I want to correct you Anson because it's just not true that the British experience or the American experience of industrialization in any way compares with the Chinese achievement the British industrial revolution between 1780 and 1830 which was the key pair or you can push it to 1840 the growth rate was around about on average one and a half percent a year one and a half percent a year and that was a population what 2030 million at that time probably more like 20 million at that time or take America you mention America well the period between the end of the Civil War the mid 1860s to 1914 the American growth rate never exceeded on average something like 3.5% and that of course again was a much smaller population so that is why I suggest that this is the most remarkable economic transformation there has ever been and it has been presided over by the Chinese gun and it has lifted I mean let's remember this as well if you look at the reduction in global poverty over the last thirty years China is over well is responsible for the overwhelming bulk of that reduction in poverty if you take China out of the equation actually the global performance has been very disappointing now I challenge the view that this does not the Chinese government does not enjoy the support of overwhelming mass of Chinese people I don't know you know if you look at for example the Pew Global Attitudes surveys the support for the Chinese government is is extraordinary impressive if you look at Tony seichas work from the Harvard Kennedy School in terms of the levels of satisfaction amongst the Chinese in terms of government you know the ratings are extremely high indeed and is it so surprising if your living standards are growing as they have been now for a while at roughly the same pace of economic growth 10% a year then you know it's quite likely that your populate your population is going to be rather pleased with with government and I challenge the idea also that you know the political of course there are many things that are different from what we're used to which we would certainly object to but the idea that the sort of political atmosphere the political environment is frozen is a mistake I mean the idea that every you know you said dissent is crushed excuse me I mean there are about a hundred and fifty thousand mass incidents every year in China in which people which mainly consists of farmers objecting to what they regard to be the elicit seizure of their land by local government flogging it off to to to property developers and these actions are well you know they're reported in lots of places and they take place and it's not true that they're all suppressed and sometimes when there is suppression like in we can actually the authorities are forced to retreat or take the wave of strikes in Guangdong province and in the eastern coast in Shanghai in 2000 2010 and 2011 tens and tens of thousands of people on strike and they were not surprised they were allowed to happen and the result huge wage increases the minimum wage in Beijing was increased during that period by 30% Shanghai roughly similar and saw huge lift in living standard so it's not good enough I to be frank to paint China as this sort of autocracy with a central government which suppresses everything there has been a huge shift in the personal freedoms of the average Chinese since the death of Mao you've only got to go to Shanghai or to Guangzhou or to Chengdu and you can see it on the streets and it's not true that everything is centered actually the censorship in China is much lighter than it used to be much lighter and the excess to Information sure there are controls on the internet but quite frankly if you want to you can get random so this is a society which is throbbing actually and it's vibrating with debate contrary to the picture that Anson has presented which is a very common picture presented to Western audiences um I want you to just say something else you see my concentration in what I want to say is really about China as a developing now let's take a comparative example indium in 1950 which has got in many ways a most impressive democracy in 1950 the Chinese economy and the Indian economy were more or less the same size today the Chinese economy is four times the size of the Indian economy why because the economic strategy pursued by the Chinese has been far more successful than the strategy which has have been employed by India and India has a great problem it's got a most impressive democracy which is what we celebrate and an extremely corrupt and inefficient state which cannot deliver in other words in that sense it's opposite to China and the poverty reduction in China has been far anyone who goes to China goes to and you can see this has been far more successful that anything that has been achieved in India now I think also we need a bit of humility about this China is a huge as where we pointed out a huge country on a scale look is unimaginable to us in the West so we and whit's task has been how to it has been in an industrial revolution essentially economic takeoff as rosto described it the shift from the countryside to industry around the time of juncture of paying it was at not much more than 20% of the population lived in the urban centers today it's 50% now what was the situation politically excuse me in the West in Europe in the United States when we were having our industrial revolutions how many Western countries were democracies at the time of their industrial revolutions shall I tell you how many zero zero in Britain in 1850 finally one-fifth of men had the right to vote that was after the lucien of the Industrial Revolution and it was not until the 1880s that most men had the vote but not women or take America it was not until 1860 that most white men gained the vote but not blacks really until the 1960s and women in 1920 and if you look at Europe exactly the same pattern their industrial revolutions were accomplished essentially in France in Germany in Italy and so on before they had democracy so when so when we say they should be like us well actually we should speak we should speak with more modesty because we weren't like what we want them to be during this particular historical face I would like to conclude by just saying this first of all I would ask our my my country to be more modest I'm more humble in the face of China's extraordinary achievement and not think our task is to say why the hell can't you be like us but on the contrary I think what we need with the rise of China is a much more humble attitude which recognizes risks and respects their achievement and also is willing to learn from them and what we're going to face I think now is not just feeling that democracy is important but also we need to learn from the Chinese about state competence this is not as subjects that's been discussed in the West but it will be discussed in the West and here we have much to learn from the Chinese thank you very much so our next speaker speaking against the motion is Jonathan Mirsky a historian of China in 1989 named international reporter of the year for his coverage of the Chairman's uprising by British that was the award by British newspapers Jonathan's interest in China he's explained to me goes right back from his parents who lived in Beijing in the 1930s working in the Peking University Medical Colleges Jonathan it's a pleasure to have you at the debate I feel very uneasy about going on about this because I think Anson as I just wrote a note to her gave the very best talk on what democracy and civil rights are really all about that I've ever heard in my life I think my friend Roger Garside may be here do you wait to put your hands up are you here Roger yes there he is he wrote a book a long time ago after Mao's death called coming alive in Peking when he was in was just after he'd been in the British Embassy there it was about democracy wall as it was called and the man who had been the great star of democracy what was waging tion who went to jail for 15 years thereafter for what was called a sedition so I'm not here to say that the American or the British model of democracy is the best or even a model I'm certainly not going to say when Martin Jake said that we have to learn that a bad a bad model of democracy is Italy but we could think about Iceland or Sweden or Norway now what I really have in mind is this for four years when I was in a kind of second stage of learning about China I lived in China and there was a very brutal dictator in charge he had a terrifying wife there were a lot of political prisoners there was no free press it was really very scary if you were a Chinese then that dictator died and before long his son took over and that place is now a democracy that's Taiwan it's full of Chinese who wanted really what in fact had been denied to them for many years and after that I worked in China for many years and over and over again in Tiananmen and then lots of other times and places in China I saw the Chinese the need of many Chinese as they expressed for these models of a kind of democracy a free press that's not stifled that you can say what it's like and can even be pornographic and wrong and libelous and scabrous that there should be free speech that aside from again from slander and things of that kind in racist remarks that there should be free speech that there should be freedom of assembly that people in get together in groups in fact it's what it's what Obama said last night in his speech that what you see in America is the argument for political change impossible in China today but a good thing regular elections that people know are going to happen you might get a terrible leader you might get a good one you you can't be sure but at least people can get rid of the government or they know it'll go away after a while and above all the rule of law something really predictable and then I think is it just it's the thing I was thinking about in the cab coming over a real education so that if you meet young Chinese who are the elite who were here at the LSE or at Oxford or Cambridge and if you say to them what happened in ten on one Square in 1989 they say it was a riot and bad people shut down our army and our police that's what they've been taught in school and there are many examples of that kind of thing so what we see is that on the Chinese internet I just did this today to see what the words were that you can't get it or not they're not available you can't you can't read about one job out of the premier who turns out to be in a family of billionaires the word Taiwan can't appear in the Chinese internet unless you're very good at dodging around it or democracy Tibet Dalai Lama if you use any of those words there can be a knock on the door and you can go inside it's true that you can say things you can say things in restaurants or you can say things outside and then all of a sudden something happens so that if you're the Nobel Prize winner Lee Shabbo you go into jail for about 11 years or AI weiwei the man who helped to design the Olympic Stadium is a man who now can't leave China there is no real concerted political action if you try that as intend on mine and in the 300 other cities where there were big demonstrations in the spring of 1989 if you try that the people who have tried that concerted political action may or may not go to jail or they may be shot down or what we just heard about the Standing Committee that's about to be unveiled that's what's about to happen in China they're about to have seven or nine new men new men always they're being unveiled now I think there is 700 of you here I wonder if there are 20 people in this room who can name one name of those people who are going to be running China in in the next 10 years and most Chinese are the same they have never heard of most of these people and they will discover who they are after they've been unveiled in law the Chinese statement is verdict first trial afterwards and that happens over and over again so that for instance when the wife of a man who's now also been disgraced who was about to go onto the Standing Committee what she lied she she was accused of murdering the British businessman Hayward she read out what was the charge against her it all been it had all been written down for her at her trial and then she was condemned and as I say in education if you ask Chinese now what they know about their own past it's very very little and if you ask them what they think happened in certain great events or what they think of the Dalai Lama or about what goes on in Tibet they'll give you the government line so these are the things that I think are the big problems that free speech some kind of Community Action a free press all of these things wouldn't change these things but they would start to make it possible to think about changing them the enormous gap in China between rich and poor which is very well expressed in mr. Jake's book the vast official corruption which is what the Chinese say when they're polled by Pew is it is the thing that they regard as the most important problem the one-child system which may be now about to be changed which has led to a very unbalanced society in which they were far too many old people and young people are going to have to support huge families and very very old I think we'll talk some more about this in the question-and-answer session so what I'm not saying is that we have the model here or that we in the West have solve these problems but these problems about corruption about the violence of the state about the fact that Mao Zedong's portrait still hangs over Chen on one square can you imagine that happening in Germany with Hitler or in Cambodia with Pol Pot and it's really revolting isn't it so I think that we can discuss all this in the question and answer period I look forward to that I'd like to say one more thing if I were a Chinese and I said any of the things that I've just said here to you tonight and I said these things in China I go straight to jail tomorrow and I'd be in jail for years and years and years it's a great thing isn't it that we can say these things here or that my Chinese colleagues can say what they want to say here they can say it and nothing will happen if I tried saying these things and I were a Chinese in China today I'd be tomorrow I'd be behind bars so think about that to think how you would like it if you were a Chinese thanks so that's the formal proposes for and against the motion let me now announce to you what your views were as you walked into the hall before the debate began those of you voting for the motion let's to say those of you believing that Western liberal democracy would be wrong for China 228 those against the motion 202 and those in the don't know category which we hope will be 0 at the end of the debate 196 so there's 196 minds out there to shape panelists you've now got a chance to answer some of their questions so let me open it up to you questions comments if they're comments they're going to have to be very brief yes over just right in front of you a gentleman's holding his hand up yep hi one of the key things for that it's dimension of the legitimacy of the Chinese government is the amount of growth in China which is historically unprecedented why is China growing so fast I'd love to understand that bit better great and next if if you can come up to the middle here the lady with her hand up I've just got a couple of quick comments to make firstly whilst the economic growth has been unprecedented in China over the last 30 years it seems it's becoming increasingly untenable with the civil riots have been taking place they've increased tenfold in the last 10 years from what I understand to over about 150,000 per year surely that's a sign of growing civil unrest and secondly I just want you to make a point to say that the function of the state is to serve the people but if the people can't create consensus or participate with decisions of the state then surely the state isn't serving the country's true interests thank you up here to the gentleman in the front during the Great Leap Forward by initiative and might see Tong in 1958 it's estimated that 38 million people died of starvation and it seems to me that an authority in authoritarian regime such as China is fundamentally ill-equipped to prevent a repetition of such a catastrophe thank you I'm going to take one more question and then come to the panelists just back there the gentleman with his hand up if you have to make a comparison are chinese more like asian roman or asian greek in two weeks so panelists why is China growing so fast oh I think the year that the growth has been largely led by exports and by investment much of it increasingly state directed investment and I should point out the sort of double-digit growth that has been sustained in the past few decades I doubt very much whether they can be sustained in the longer run because there is a cost there is a price to be paid for this type of growth and you need also to look at the quality of growth what the the strong growth has resulted in is that the leadership has not been particularly successful as they themselves on to to move away from export and investment to consumer spending and stimulating a domestic demand they have not succeeded in this the the fixed income investment in 201 1 was equivalent to 50% of GDP that now that is not a particularly efficient use of resources and the growth has resulted in over capacity particularly in infrastructure and in property it has as I pointed out led to growing income disparity to very serious environmental degradation and these are the costs that future generations of Chinese will have to pay Martin wasn't the question was it I thought the question was why has China been growing so quickly yes and I think that's a very a polite question and it's not so simple to give you the answer I mean I think there are there must be a whole cluster of reasons for it that's not just one or two first of all I think that there was clearly enormous pent up possibility in China I mean China historically until the beginning of you know till the mid 19th century and the opium wars and so on China had been a remarkably successful economy I mean in 1800 it had as average living standards on a par with northwest Europe and before that it had a living standards much higher and it was a much more developed economy so clearly within the Chinese historical experience was a great potential and possibility secondly I think that the what they began to do was to learn to learn not just from the West but to learn from and not just Hong Kong either but to learn from East Asia I mean the most remarkable successful economies in this period were in East Asia like Korea like Taiwan and so on and I think the Chinese and enjoying this period learned a great deal thirdly the state under dong Xiao ping was remark was remarkably pragmatic in his approach remarkably very pragmatic and very non ideological which and this was the new example and it's set to order for the Chinese and that's how I think many many many Chinese get many young p.m. et today are very very pragmatic and a fantastically good learners and I think this is what China has been and my last point for this now would be to just say there is a the Chinese don't go on about a China model but it does have to I think particular characteristics which are most unusual one is a enormous commitment to the market a ferocious market I mean Adam Smith writing in the late 18th century said the Chinese market is far more developed than anything we've ever seen in Europe or that we have in Europe but that is combined with an extraordinary state it's a ubiquitous state it has it this is not just in the communist period this is a long Chinese tradition running back into the Imperial through the Imperial period and the Chinese state takes on responsibilities which are much much wider than is anything is true of our own tradition and is historically not just now historically an extremely competent institution so I think that is a particular paradigm with we're going to be exploring for a long time to come Thank You Martin wait wait 38 million died of starvation I mean the work of a march of sin and Jean Dre's tells us that that doesn't happen when you've got democracy in the first place Great Leap Forward was a tragedy and every win China knew about this but what's important was actually the person who drew more or less in there others was not other than ten selfie he drew so much lesson that he began this gigantic reform which put this into an a kind of never will happen again so when we talk about this length of growth speed of growth it's important that the Chinese state competence to put a given example whoever planned seventy years started in 1970 to 2050 and within this seventy year clever five year plan five year plan this kind of strategic planning creates tremendous what I call long-term demand unprecedented in human history so in China if you look at the growth of people's wealth it's a revolution now just with all respect to modern change I was in Hong Kong first hand three decades ago full of admiration but today you went to hunger any time if you you find in the housing condition was so poor compared with most Chinese live in the cities no just an example to show that and this issue concerning yeah oh sorry I should be closing my and also by the way concerning this famine it's also happened during the British colonialism you have a potato famine island you have a Bangalore family British India when pencil population died so each country perhaps has some ugly part of its history we have to be honest with that the problem is whether you can deal with it yet now China has succeeded in dealing with that we can export and now concern this allegedly how many rights and channels is somehow unstable actually I don't worry about this at all you know in the first place I don't know exactly how accurate this figure is but what's more important is the gas use our argument comes in civilizational state in Chinese we have a saying France wrong history we're opposed to the local officials but not the Emperor you know so all these so-called a hundred thousand case is 99% happen in the very grassroots in the village whatever and they are not telling the central government even provincial government is sufficient to pacify the situation so this is very very not be good I think I'm less and more concerned with British summer rights rather than this one indeed and yeah yeah I think Channel has found its own mode of development which is very effective which is broadly supported within China I think along with this model around is coming Party Congress we can expect within a decade China's economy will be larger than the US economy and furthermore was more important it's highly likely by that time ten years from now China's real middle class I mean economic standards decent job plus a property will be twice of the American population which means 600 million people thank you a way Jonathan Mirsky Romans or Greeks sorry am I in the right hole I'd like to answer your question I'd like to answer your question about what happened I mean why so fast I'll just give you one little brief fact take a look at a recently published book by H woman called pi Xiao Hong call shelf of sand she estimates that 45 percent of China's GDP is the work of displaced peasants who are working in China cities with no rights at all no medical treatment no education so these are hardly the recognized citizens of China so do do if you'd like to check that out do as for here's his another possibility if China is the presence of China were so advanced as in some sense they were in the 18th and 19th century what did dung Xiao ping do he got out of their way he didn't do anything he just let them produce and that's what jobs a young a man who was originally who was in the end was put under house arrest by done he pointed out that in the province where he was the party secretary that the peasants were taking their land back and that their production was going way up so the Chinese who are no more or less hard-working than anyone else have simply when they've been given the chance have produced a lot and the right list Chinese those people from the farms who first went down to the failing factories in the south and now work in the city with no rights are the people who have produced a lot of the GDP thank you and I'm going to say that's enough I didn't understand what you meant about Greece and Rome by the way we'll come back to that um more questions so if you can come over to this side now we've been biased to the side up to the front sorry I'm interested Martin Jax you said that perhaps at some point in the near or distant future China might be right for democracy and what what changes would have to happen and what really would represent the the tipping element for that great if you can pass the man behind you with the orange sweater ensign Chen I assume you reached your powerful position without being voted in by a single Hong Kong resident why do you think the UK thought it was wrong for Hong Kong to have liberal democracy even the last Governor Chris Patten was imposed upon you was that a mistake a question it's why so the question the question is why did Britain think that it was wrong for Hong Kong to have direct democracy but we'll come back we'll come to the answers in a moment further questions so at the the hand in the middle of this block here right across we've heard a lot about being by for and out of the people but China as the speakers clearly shown is a nation for the people as you can see by the huge amount of people that been left out of poverty but America a nation supposedly founded on being by for and of the people we've just seen an election funded almost entirely by special interest groups really from Big Oil the NRA rich and evangelical Christians and the funding radical candidates they can choose and where both of the candidates attended the same university so how I ask you is that by foreign of the people in any sense more than it is more than the Chinese are thank you and any further questions I'm looking at that towards the back of the hall so that you're not disempowered by geography but um thank you yep is Tibet today what Czechoslovakia was in 1938 that if China continues to grow are we going to receive the treatment which is currently being meted out to the Tibetans so is Tibet today what checkers of Archaea was in 1938 was that last question and we'll take one more question just down here I'll come to you in the next lot yes thank you I respect what the others have said but it seems to me the only person who's tried to argue the motion is Zhang Wei Wei the others have merely made comments about China which are wholly respect and I think the core of Zhang Weiwei's argument is that China is so big and so diverse that mass political parties wouldn't work and that seems to be the key distinction because Nobi didn't had eyes that there should be more rule of law less corruption and more of a Free Press etc etc I don't suppose owing Wei Wei denies that at all the key distinction is mass political parties and I think Wei was angry Wei has argued that they just wouldn't work have I grasped it correctly thank you so let's let's take the first and last questions together is China too big for democracy and what changes are necessary for China to be ripe for democracy which was aimed at Martin who would like to jump in okay I think my name is Martin hmm um I challenge that I must say what a contrary tear you are um well I I'm absolutely sure that over time China as it has been over the last thirty years will become more open more transparent more representative more accountable and as the population you know was for so long obviously focused on basically survival and then you know trying to get a better living standards in situation of poverty as it as its living standards greatly improve and lifestyle improves they're faced with a range of choices and that will influence the whole culture and the politics of China the question is this is the question what will it look like will that will that take the form of what we're what we call western-style democracy or will it take some other form and I really don't know the answer to it but the question that was put to you was what are the changes necessary for China to be ripe for democracy just whatever kind of democracy that is what should we excuse me that's exactly what I've just been talking about so what so what will those changes be in one what well they are yeah they are about rising living standards and the transformation of people's lives and conditions and possibilities and choices and opportunities so I I do subscribe to the view that as China becomes more prosperous then pressures for for greater democratization will greatly increase now what the quickly that you are you asked another question which is what will it be like what all those what will a chinese democracy be like and i am i think that you know factors like what Weiwei's been talking about which is the sheer size of china and the diversity of china play here because actually no sub global system which in a way is what china is has been a democracy you know the European Union is a new democracy so size is a serie is a serious factor not necessary compelling factor but it is serious factor in relationship to it now the other point I want to make is this there's no tradition in China of popular sovereignty there never has been likewise by the way there's not really a serious tradition of popular sovereignty in Japan Japan in my view has a bolt-on western-style democracy but actually what really happens is state sovereignty which is accepted in Japan and China it's a Confucian tradition and so Japan is really run by its state bureaucracy although it appears to be like a western-style democracy and I think it's quite possible that you know what will happen in China will be that there will be all sorts of new forms of expression and popular expression and so on but because Chinese history because of the way Chinese see it state sovereignty will still in large measure lie at the heart of whatever China becomes I just want to say one other thing great question great question on Hong Kong and the fascinating paradox is that it will be in 2017 it looks as if the chief executive will be elected by the Hong Kong population which is something that the British did not achieve in 150 years yes absolutely um so Anson Chan would you like to respond okay yes but I like to ask a martynuk question if and when China is ready for democracy does he also envisage the disintegration of the one-party system rule it's and if so when well I don't know when it is a possibility I mean nothing is forever nothing is eternal so with respect that is not the motion before us the motion actually says Western liberal democracy would be bad for China it doesn't put a time frame well nobody is advocating a quantum leap at the moment what we're saying what I'm saying at least is that there should be an evolutionary process to democracy as there was in Hong Kong and you mentioned that in the year 2017 Hong Kong will have universal suffer'd I think that remains very much to be seen I doubt very much whether there will be genuine one-man one-vote but I would be delighted to be proven wrong okay can I answer that question I think it depends on what you mean by democracy hmm I don't think democracy centers just on one man one vote I'm willing to concede that at this stage maybe one man one vote is a little too early but there are the other aspects of democracy which I believe to be important for all nation and for all human beings and that is human dignity some basic rights and freedoms the right to participate in the governance to improve the quality of governance to have some say in issues that affect their everyday life to have the rule of law not the rule of men not rule by law and to have an independent judiciary that is not subject to the dictates of the one-party system rule now III agree with Martin that in the three thirty years since open-door policy there has been phenomenal economic growth there has been a degree of personal freedom and social mobility but the sad fact is that in recent years market economy reforms have stalled and the government has backtracked on legal reforms or judicial organs in China are now subject to the dictates of the one-party system rule do we seriously think that the population that the 1.3 billion people in mainland China are content to accept this you say that there are mass support for the one-party system rule why is it then that we get people in from mainland coming to Hong Kong to participate in demonstration particularly against the blind dissident jung yong who was alleged to have committed suicide and senchan could you could you answer the question I will I will gladly answer the question first of all I like to point out I was not a politician therefore I was not elected I was a civil servant and I was elected I hope I was appointed as a result of a series of competitive examinations I like to think that the recruitment ball recruited me because they saw some potential me I did not owe my appointment nor my subsequent promotion to political patronage and and after I retired I was democratically elected I did participate in a by-election to the Legislative Council and I want weh-weh well I will see a few words on this issue of one-party system you know I think indeed - in the same China that have to move a bit away from our own European experience or whatsoever Westing experience if you have to apply this concept one-party I can say you know over the past 2,200 years 99% of the time China was on the one-party rule except who had tried Republican and revolution and then the country degenerate into chaos and civil wars and of this 2200 years Chan was indeed we head of Europe for 1700 years we missed Industrial Revolution and they were became that word when over the past three decades China indeed catching up very fast so the Chinese one party this party has nothing to do with conservative party labour party it's a continuation of the older tradition in China what we call the unified state Confucian stage at the center of the Chinese States all will unify the political entity based on meritocracy officials were selected thousands of years passing competitive exams and further from that wait listen can I pick up the question that the two of the audience brought to you which so your argument with as they understood it was that China is too big for democracy and your debating partners argument is that China is not yet ripe for democracy what's your view is it that it's too big and not right or but it's we're also both first simply too big too diverse actually to practice western-style democracy it's a suicidal vote on country well break up overnight yeah we had experienced earlier trials again to be honest you ask 10 Chinese 9 will tell you it's unbelievable unimaginable China have so-called modern parties every four years you change the central government its 1.3 1.4 billion people it says it's no joke you have to go it's a gradual process actually I'm not thinking you know China is really moving towards western-style democracy that's not the right word we're very confident we can compete with wealth in political system I'm writing an article which hopefully work in New York Times in the coming days called America tock receiver see democracy China may win yeah this meritocracy is wonderful we had this for solid of years and we really draw a lot from European experience so we called meritocracy in bracket selection plus election it functions very well thank you I'm any panelist willing to give us 30 seconds on Tibet is Tibet today what Czechoslovakia was in 1938 do I have any takers Jonathan perhaps this is aimed at youth am i giving you the hardest questions Jonathan and I've bent at about six times the Chinese tried very hard Chinese occupation tried very hard to smash Tibetan Buddhism and the way of life it hasn't worked it hasn't worked that's why Tibetans are setting themselves on fire in all the times that I was in Tibet if you got to know what Tibetan a little bit he'd take a picture of the Dalai Lama out of his pocket and kiss it or press it to his head so just that alone is one of those things that if I were a Chinese I would feel ashamed of myself about but that's not really what I want to say at the moment what I'd like to say is this it's enough to make anybody weep to think that it has now been forgotten that in nineteen nineteen eighty nine and ten on one there were hundreds of thousands of people in Tiananmen and in 300 other Chinese cities and what were they saying da da dong Xiao ping down with Deng Xiaoping smashed on joking leepung the premiere shot I get off and they were shouting out for democracy smashed by tanks hundreds of people were killed lots of people are still in jail from Chen on Mon the word is taboo when the Internet it can't be mentioned it's deadly and young Chinese have now bought into that because they don't know any better the second thing is about piu the the pollsters in their most recent poll what they've said is that 70 percent of well-educated urban Chinese admire the American system of democracy and what did Tony say CH who's been invoked here also at Harvard say in his most recent thing I just read it today the paternalism of the Maoist state retains a strong influence in China today the infantilization of society is still being managed the leadership continues to act as if it is the parent and the Chinese people are the child now that's what Tony sage who was invoked today really thinks about what's going on in China but it really makes me weep to think that all those Chinese who over the years desperately wanted democracy and by that I mean freedom of speech press assembly all those things which is the Leo Chou ball to jail for 11 years that that's all been wiped out it's not that they don't want it it's not that they're too big of course they want it those who know about it of course they want it is the same way that anybody in this room would like to have that with all of the facts here that defects in America which I left because of the Vietnamese war despite that the fact is that people can jump up and down they can coalesce they can form parties it can write in the newspapers Chinese cannot do that the society would not fall apart if that happened what would happen is that the party which is hardly mentioned here tonight which is called the state the party might be hauled out that would be a very good thing for China thank you now we're moving when moving rapidly into our final straight so let me just remind you that you're going to soon have a little box thrust in front of you to vote and you are all going to vote so you're going to take your ticket we're going to rip it in half and you're either going to vote for the motion or against the motion based on how much you've been persuaded by the arguments that have been put to you tonight to assist you in that process I'm going to ask each panelist for their two-minute takeaway the two minute thought that they want you to leave this hall having resonating in your ears and we're going to go in reverse order to their opening speeches so Jonathan oh I feel I've had my say I donate my two minutes to answer wow she gets four minutes Martin well my my part my parting thought for you is only adjacent to what we've been discussing but it because I think what we've been discussing raises a much more much wider question which is we don't really understand China and we as Westerners try and understand China through a Western prism and we expect our agenda with regard to China to be the agenda which the Chinese should follow and we get very frustrated and impatient when that doesn't happen and it's not going to happen because actually we need to understand China in its own terms we need to understand and respect the history and culture of what is an entirely different phenomenon to anything that is encompassed by the Western experience China I would argue for example is although it has called itself a nation-state as a result of weakness around about 1900 is not primarily a nation state it is a civilization state and it's a civilization state which works in entire only different way the notion of identity of the Chinese is not a function of nation as it is with Westerners it's a function in the first instance overwhelmingly of it of their relationship to civilization so their sense of awareness their sense of identity is fundamentally different why do you know why do why do the Chinese have such a different attitude towards Westerners to the state the reason is because the structure of the relationship between state and society in China is profoundly different as a consequence of the fact that the Chinese feel the function of the state above all is its relationship to maintain the unity and the well-being of Chinese civilization so therefore the Chinese view of the state is not like as we view it with certain amount of suspicion and certainly a lot of restraint the Chinese don't see it like that for the Chinese the state is the family writ large and therefore they see the state rather like the head of the family now this is so different from the Western tradition and this is our great challenge I think over the 21st century because China is going to become the largest economy in the world it's going to become hugely the most influential projections 2030 other China will be responsible one-third of global GDP where America will be responsible for roughly 70% what's the great challenge facing Westerners for the next century the task is to understand and make sense of China because the world will become less and less Western and more and more China centric thank you Martin Anson Chan um no to minutes will do I I think Martin I won't be right that sooner rather than later China will become the largest economy in the world it will have increasing economic clout and will seek to use is so-called soft power so against that background all the more important that what happens within China how its people are treated how those in power govern because they do have an impact on Hong Kong on the rest of the world at this stage of China's development where we talk about democracy as I said earlier in reply to a question we're not saying you should move straight to multi-party system rule we're not saying there should be one man one vote but we are saying that the people Chinese people are no different from all human beings on this planet they one human dignity they want participation in government they want fair just society in which the growing economic wealth of the nation as a whole is equally shared in the same way as they are expected to share in the pain when there is an economic downturn it is anybody's guess whether the phenomenal year average ten percent growth achieved in the past three decades are going to be sustained I rather think not the point is that China is at a stage of development where to sustain economic growth to achieve real social harmony there has got to be reforms on the political side leaders often doubt the importance of maintaining harmony but harmony cannot be subject to the dictates of the ruling party how many only comes when every individual the masses feel that they are fairly treated at the moment we see actually two classes of people look at the way that migrant workers who do not have Huckel are treated they don't have access to education to a lot of other social welfare services you have a growing income disparity at least in the early days of the communist takeover those in the rural population did see a significant improvement in their standard but in recent years the income disparity between those in the urban areas and those in the countryside are not narrowing they are widening we have massive overcapacity we I think we have a looming difficulty over non-performing loans because there has been vast credit expansion particularly following the Wall Street collapse in 208 so for the sake of all of us I think Chinese leaders and I hope that the new log leaders coming in will have the vision the foresight the courage and the political clout to initiate political reforms in order to underpin Hong Kong and China's long-term prosperity thank Shango where you get the last word you get two minutes that's not four which is what Anson Chan had thanks to the generosity of her fellow panelists thank you actually the success of China can be summarized in one remark by Deng Xiaoping's which is called seeking choose from facts he just so common sense you check with any Chinese you meet in London in Europe in Beijing in Shanghai in China United States I can tell you by my minimal estimation eighty percent diversity to this China is best time China's own history just common sense approach whatever opinion surveys you conducted even human rights so seek truth from facts even on this controversy of the Freid of the media freedom press you know my goodness you can press any button check international it have fun a huntress all the articles criticizing China garden on the Chinese websites yep it's just so part of common sense it's vibrating with internal debate on all kinds of issues it's totally different from the past foreign time when Jonathan was in China now there are alleged so-called the persecution of certain dissidents and these are really the radical of the radicals by Chinese and even the Chinese approach' to them is I'm afraid you know it pales a lot or much in comparison with the Americas persecution of wiki League and asan G no comparison well one final remark in 1793 British king sent an envoy to China and had a audience with Chinese emperor the Chinese emperor was so arrogant is the channel with the best his end of the history Chinese version so China missed Industrial Revolution and China began to sharp decline West unfree is making same mistake really I hope West will be alarmed to this fact in this sense I agree with Martin thank you thank you very much the votes are being counted but while they are being counted we have time for a couple more comments now I'm aware that we didn't get any from this corner or up the back there so is there anyone dying to make a comment yes they're right in front of you oh oh okay please stir um I always get quite nervous when everyone says that China is going to carry on growing because that's exactly the kind of reasoning that had people had behind the whole subprime mortgage crash and China is doing very well politically when they're growing at 10% but at some point they're going to have to combat recession or at least slow growth I feel that if you don't you know if when people hit recession and that's when people feel they need an outlet for their anger you're saying that 80% of people support the government what happens when only 20% of the people support the government when they have a recession how is the one party government going to deal with that that's my worry about China thank you we're not gonna have time for answers but this lady here had one last comment Jim was addressed by an some chance so it was all really about human rights and that everybody should have the opportunity to be able to vote to be able to pen the word and all the things that an sunshine has said I agree with wholeheartedly and I just like to say on behalf of the entire room that I think the debate has already been won by you say thank you yeah and with just to lengthen the suspense by 30 seconds I'm going to get 30 seconds to the lady here in the scarf Thank You Larry um I think we should at least have one person from China's younger generation to speak here as a Chinese I feel thrilled that there's opinion that China is going to roll the century very soon and it feels really good to be able to vote but my question is does economic growth or remarkable achievement as Marty but it really justify the flaws in the current political system in China and is the current political system really enables every citizen or at least the majority of the population in China to share the fruit of economic development thank you thank you very much and now the debate result so the good news for Martin and Weiwei is that they have persuaded one person in the room to change their mind voting for the motion were 229 people you'll recall there were 228 before you came in now voting against the motion persuaded by Anson Chan and Jonathan Mirsky 362 that's a that's a lot of swing voters and a lot of committed voters swinging and the result I as chair and most thrilled about is that only 24 people decided that they didn't know so a huge thank you do we know we are live and we're going to come and get you later you decide good thank you you

Channel: Intelligence Squared

Views: 757,404

Keywords:

Id: EwM9CuGcBgI

Length: 99min 26sec (5966 seconds)

Published: Fri Nov 09 2012