Assess the view that Jiang and Deng have different approaches to the

governance of China.
After Chinas opening up in 1978, CCP has transformed form a dogmatic
and closed party to an organisation that is pragmatic and responsive to
popular needs to retain its relevance in Chinas new socio economic
realities. Although approach of Jiang to the governance of China serve
more to democratise China so as to improve the image of CCP, it still
governs with a top-down approach and is adamant about monopoly
political power. Therefore, this essay seeks to argue that fundamentally,
Jiang and Deng have the same approaches to the governance of China as
the underlying principle to monopolise political power remains the same.
The previous justification for CCP used by Deng has been modified by
Jiang in the governance of China to suit Chinas new socio-economic
realities. The adoption of new party statutes and state constitution with
modification to the state ideology from Dengs socialism with Chinese
characteristics to Jiangs Three Represents have placed a larger emphasis
on the need for technocrats and entrepreneurs to be included in the
government of China while downplaying the role of peasants as the latter
becomes increasingly out of touch with the socio-economic needs of the
country. State-directed economic development and high growth rate that
is formed on the basis of the new leadership under Jiang in turn served to
safeguard CCPs governance as a centralised and strong party which is
different from Deng.
Still, CCPs legitimacy to govern under Jiang is predicated upon the
justification by its Marxist ideology just like Deng. Communism with its
emphasis on socialist dictatorship explains why there is only one party as
the governing authority in China. This confers CCP with the rights to
outlaw the existence of other political parties and validates the omission
of elections or democratic practices. Mao Zedong, who liberalised the
country and its people through the revolution of the civil war, as well as
CCPs allegiance to the Marxism-Leninism-Maoism ideology, then justify
why CCP is that one party that will have that unquestioned and
unchallenged authority. Anyone that wishes to join in the governance of
China would have to join the cadre school since young where they would
be taught Maoist ideas. In this way, CCPs legitimacy is crutched onto the
Marxist ideology and because CCPs fundamental principle is to remain as
the sole governing authority in China, no matter how justification for CCPs
governance is modified to suit the new socio-economic realities, the
approaches of both Jiang and Deng in the governance of China are still
fundamentally the same.
Under Jiang, to improve the democratic image off CCP and to accede to
the demands of a more vocal public, there is more tolerance for differing
views from the society when policies are push forth as compared to Deng.
Open debate on national policies and meet-the people sessions by local
officials are organised to hear the differing views from the society. Village

elections are held at local level and more autonomy have been granted in
setting policies. The introduction of village committees and village
assemblies enforces greater responsibility on local CCP bosses to develop
the rural areas. Village CCP party secretaries have share power with the
village committees. The impact of diversification of political power in the
rural areas remains to be seen as the local CCP leaders still hold onto
leadership, thus showing that Jiang has indeed adapted to the new socioeconomic realities and has become more tolerant of opposing views in his
governance of China as compared to Deng.
However, Jiang continues to rely on propaganda and censorship as means
to stifle resentful voice as it push forth its policies just like Deng. Where
the government see fit, CCP can inhibit and distort information as long as
they perceive it as a threat to social and political stability. Under Jiang up
till 1997 when Deng died, the Internet was not liberalised. Even after it
was liberalised, strong authoritarian regulations were implemented to
stymie civic awareness that is detrimental to the governance of CCP.
Google searches like Tiananmen Square protest of 1989, June Fourth
Massacre and Gang of Four are removed in China from public view.
Even on online forums, propaganda teams like the five-cent gang are
employed to tilt online debates and discussions in the favour of CCP by
bombarding the pages with favourable comments for the government or
by criticising seditious views. Therefore, evidently, propaganda and
censorship are still heavily used by Jiang in the governance of China to
stifle resentful voice as it push forth its policies just like Deng.
Institutionalisation was employed more by Jiang to bring about greater
accountability and transparency in the governance of China. Whereas
under Deng, the de facto leader of China is able to enjoy limitless amount
of time in power, every leader from Jiang onwards is limited by the
constitution to a fixed leadership term of ten years and after which, the
entire generation of leaders would have to step down to be taken over by
a new generation of leaders to prevent retention of power. Retired leaders
are also prohibited from interfering in the subsequent succession
decisions. CCP has also professionalised PLA by increasing the military
budget to make it more technically competent and less politicised so as to
curb corruption. Through the establishment of the party CMC and the
state CMC, the PLA was separated from the party and the party was
separated from the state. National Peoples Congress through the
membership adjustment of governmental bodies have also been allowed
progressively more autonomy and was taking an increasingly more
proactively role in opining their views on government policies. Therefore,
Jiang relied more on institutionalisation in bringing about greater
accountability and transparency in the governance of China.
Still, under Jiang, just like it was under Deng, CCP was still mostly
unaccountable and opaque in the governance of China. The party still
dominate over the army in the governance of China. Not having any
military credentials meant that Jiang all the more was deliberate in

ensuring that he has dominance over the army. Even though the CMC was
formed to place the PLA under the control of the state and not the party,
because membership of the two CMCs often overlaps, the party was still in
full control over the army. Key positions in the army were granted to
people under patronage of Jiang. The problem of overlapping membership
and common interest shared by the regulatory bodies makes many of
CCPs institutionalisation attempts at enforcing checks and balances
ostensible and ineffective. Even though Jiang was supposed to be
discharged of all political powers after he stepped down at the state
president in 2002, he held on to his position as the chairman of the party
CMC and did not pass on to Hu Jing Tao until 2004 after he had secured
the continued protection of personal and factional interest. Riddled by
guanxi, Jiang even up till today still possess immense amount of political
power due to ambiguous relationship. Therefore despite greater
institutionalisation, governance of China under both leaders was still
opaque and unchecked.
In conclusion, governance of China under Jiang was indeed more
responsive to popular demands and democratic. However, driven by a
determination to perpetuate CCP authoritarian rule, reforms of
democratisation under Jiang were mere baby steps and approaches to the
governance fundamentally still remained just as how they were under
Deng. When demands of reforms by the more vocal populace collide with
the agenda of CCP to monopolise power, changes in approaches of
governance of China will halt. Thus, approaches to the governance off CCP
under the two leaders were fundamentally the same.