What are the main differences between Chinese and western cultures? There must be evidence (phenomenon) to explain!

The third wave of democratization was named after a book by Professor samuel huntington in the United States. In this book/kloc-published 0/6 years ago, Huntington wrote: "The democratization movement is a global movement. 15 years, the wave of democratization swept through South America and crossed the authoritarian regime of the Soviet bloc. " However, things change. Since the beginning of the new century, Heinz's "wave of democratization", which lasted for nearly 30 years, has undergone remarkable changes.

With the decline of the "third wave", many countries outside the West are re-exploring their own political development path.

In the 1990s, the "Third Wave" first triggered a serious social recession and crisis in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Over the past few years, Russia's GDP has actually been reduced by half, and people's lives have also been greatly reduced. This is the biggest economic and social recession since the industrialization era without large-scale war. After the disastrous crisis, the Russian people stubbornly sought a new way out. Finally, under the leadership of President Putin, they cracked down on oligarchs, revived the economy, concentrated their efforts, paid attention to people's livelihood, reunited and walked out of the crisis. The United States, known as the model of world democracy, is very uncomfortable about this. Secretary of State condoleezza rice accused "the Russian democratic process is retrogressive, and the Duma election does not meet international standards." Ironically, it is this "retrogression" that saves a nation from disaster, but it is because it has accepted "international standards" and listened to "universal values".

After "9. 1 1", the United States launched wars in Afghanistan and Iraq one after another, and it was ambitious to realize the "Greater Middle East Democracy Plan" and establish a democratic model there that met American standards. In the past six years, President Bush and his American government have spared no effort for the "Greater Middle East Democracy Plan", but where is "democracy" besides bombing Afghanistan and Iraq?

In the 1980s and 1990s, many Latin American countries realized "democratization" and pursued neo-liberal policies, which were followed by the United States and the International Monetary Fund. However, as a result, the Latin American economy stagnated in the1980s, which was called the "lost decade". In the 1990s, Latin America lost another decade, and now the proportion of poor people in Latin America is as high as 40%, making it one of the regions with the most serious polarization between the rich and the poor and social problems in the world. At the turn of the century, a series of social unrest occurred in Latin America. Since 1997, seven elected presidents in Latin America have been forced to abdicate halfway. After 2006, except Mexico, all major countries in Latin America were "leftists". The governments of most countries denied the neo-liberal policy in the 1990s, changed the diplomatic route of being blindly pro-American in the past, and tried to take a more independent road in economy and diplomacy.

In fact, the "third wave" of "pan-Western democratization" has lost its former charm. With the so-called "third wave" recession, many countries outside the West are re-exploring their own political development path.

Western democratic countries, whose core functions are to restrict public rights and protect private rights, cannot meet the social needs of contemporary developing countries outside the West.

In vast areas and many countries outside the West, the western-style democratic model has not brought about universal prosperity and happiness, freedom and equality of citizens, national prosperity and social progress as advocated by its peddlers and expected by local people. The reasons are worth discussing and pondering. Even in South Korea, a country once regarded as a model student of "democratic transformation" by western public opinion, there has been a resurgence of political process in the past 20 years. A Korean friend of mine came to China before the Korean election. As soon as he saw me, he talked about the changes in social conditions and public opinion in Korea. He said that there is a strong public opinion in South Korea now: Look at China! China is on the rise; Look at Korea! South Korea is backward; Why? Wrong way! What shall we do? Change the dynasty! This kind of public opinion in Korean society reflects not only an election debate, but also a reflection on the social development model and road.

Huntington's so-called "liberal democracy" model characterized by freedom of speech and competitive elections is becoming more and more "acclimatized" outside the West. One of the important reasons is that this system has encountered a "stage problem", which, in layman's terms, is somewhat irrelevant.

What kind of democracy a country needs is different at different stages of social development. A country's choice of democratic form mainly depends on three factors: first, the national conditions, that is, the country's natural and economic endowments and historical and cultural traditions; The second is the development stage, that is, the current situation and main tasks facing this country; The third is the international environment. Among them, what kind of political system or democratic situation a country chooses, the stage of development is the most important. This understanding should be said to be a theoretical achievement of China's democratic research in recent years.

The reason why the western democratic system doesn't work in the vast areas outside the west is largely because the western democratic system can't meet the actual needs of social development in many non-western countries. On the surface, the contemporary western democratic system is very complicated, and its theoretical expression is quite mysterious, which smacks of "squandering flowers and getting attractive". However, after careful analysis, the western democratic system is not as complicated and mysterious as it seems. Its basic social function is nothing more than solving the relationship between "right" and "power", that is, limiting the public power of society and protecting individual rights. The relationship between "right" and "power" is the theme of contemporary western democracy.

However, the western democratic countries whose core function is to restrict public rights and satisfy private rights cannot meet the social needs of contemporary developing countries outside the West. This problem exists in developing countries that adopt socialist system or capitalist system. For developing countries, their main task is to achieve national development and prosperity. Moreover, this historical task is to be realized under the background of the world order established by western developed countries, which greatly aggravates the difficulty for developing countries to realize modernization.

Protecting rights and centralizing power are the dual functions that any developing country regime that really pursues modernization must have.

For the political system of any developing country in the era of capitalist globalization, it is faced with dual tasks: on the one hand, it can realize effective social mobilization, release and mobilize the enthusiasm of the people, and enhance the vitality of society, just as the "Five Oaths" of Japan's Meiji Restoration Social Program said: "Unite as one and make great achievements in the economy; Guanwu all the way, late for Shu Ren, each with his own ambition, makes people tireless. " It has the function of safeguarding and realizing people's rights, which is necessary for modern mobilization. However, for developing countries, the political function of protecting rights is not enough. If developing countries want to realize modernization successfully, their political system must also have the ability to gather limited people's strength and wisdom while realizing social mobilization. In other words, protecting rights and centralizing power are the dual functions that any developing country regime that really pursues modernization must have. If these requirements cannot be met at the same time, it is not an effective mechanism suitable for developing countries.

According to Huntington's political institutionalization theory, it should be said that the institutionalization level of modern western liberal democracy is not high, and its focus is on protecting citizens' personal rights, including private property rights, but it is not conducive to concentrating people's strength and wisdom. From the experience of "democratic transformation" in many developing countries since the "third wave", we can see that western democratic countries have expanded civil rights and individual freedoms to a certain extent, but at the same time, they have also brought about further social differentiation, stagnant economic development and national weakness. This shows that western democracy is not suitable for the actual needs of developing countries, and developing countries need to explore and establish a democracy that can meet the dual needs of protecting rights and centralizing power at the same time. In other words, the historical environment and development stage of developing countries determine the need for a more institutionalized democracy, rather than copying the western regime.

Democracy is not dead, and wider democratic exploration and practice are being carried out around the world.

The "third wave" has receded and democracy has not died out. On the contrary, broader democratic exploration and practice are being carried out all over the world. In the Islamic world, democracy is still developing. Iran's practice and democratic model are a focus worthy of attention. Huntington also admitted that Iran is the "most democratic country" in the Persian Gulf. This is probably because there are competitive elections in Iran, which are the basic elements of western democratic standards. However, Iran's democracy is not a "copy" of western democracy, but has strong Islamic characteristics. Iran's political system is permeated with the Islamic spirit of unity and equality and embodies the value of Islamic belief. In particular, it is worth pointing out that the qualification examination system in Iran's electoral system is an important guarantee for Iranian society to independently realize democratic politics under the strong pressure of the West. After getting rid of the deep economic crisis, Russia re-explored its own path. In the 1990s, Russians learned an unforgettable lesson: individual rights entered the room and national sovereignty was vague. Under the hazy sovereignty, human rights are extremely pale. Russians deeply understand the relationship between national sovereignty and individual rights. A new Russian democratic theory-sovereign democratic theory came into being. Its core is to seek a democratic regime that can combine powerful state and individual freedom.

China people, who account for15 of the world's population, have also explored and perfected Socialism with Chinese characteristics's democratic political system in the historical process of realizing national modernization and national rejuvenation. The core value of China's current democratic system is to combine the dual goals of rights protection and power concentration to the maximum extent. The unprecedented development of China proves the success of China's democratic political construction.

The retreat of the "third wave" has inspired many new ideas, which at least tells us that democracy is universal, but the western democratic model is not universal. Democracy still depends on the people of all countries to explore it themselves, or go their own way.