Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research

Center for Asian Public Opinion Research & Collaboration Initiative (충남대학교 아시아여론조사학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the Democratic Concepts of the People in Mainland China and Taiwan: Support and Understanding

  • Received : 2020.12.05
  • Accepted : 2021.01.09
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Through an empirical comparative analysis, we found that people in mainland China and Taiwan demonstrate strong similarities in their support for democracy, based on democratic suitability, efficiency, preference, and priority. There are also differences in beliefs about democratic values. Compared to people in mainland China, the Taiwanese have a deeper and more widely shared belief in the principles of participation and pluralism, while the differences between their beliefs in the principles of equality, freedom, and checks and balances are narrow. Furthermore, people in mainland China and Taiwan have a strong similarity in their understanding of democracy, that is, they all present a mixed democratic understanding based on substantive bias. Overall, although the differences between mainland China and Taiwan's democratic practices are reflected in the level of value identification from the perspective of democratic support and democratic understanding, the popular democratic political culture in mainland China and Taiwan still has a relatively broad consensus. Thus, the integration and development of cross-strait relations not only has an increasingly profound social and economic foundation but also considerable consensus and mass support on the political and cultural level.

Keywords

References

  1. Bell, D. A. (2015). The China model: Political meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton University Press.
  2. Chu Y.-H. (2004). Taiwan minzhu fazhan de kunjing yu tiaozhan [The predicament and challenges of Taiwan's democratic development]. Taiwan Democracy Quarterly, 1(1), 143-62. http://www.tfd.org.tw/export/sites/tfd/files/publication/quarterly/d1t1/143-162.pdf
  3. Burnham, P., Gilland, K., Grant, W., & Layton-Henry, Z. (2004). Research methods in Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
  4. Chang, Y.-T., Chu, Y.-H., Tsai, F. Confucianism and democratic values in three Chinese societies. Issues and Studies, 41(4),1-33.
  5. Chu, Y. H., Chang, Y. T., & Hu, F. (2003). Regime performance, value change and authoritarian detachment in East Asia. (no.08). Asian Barometer Working Paper Series. http://www.asianbarometer.org/publications//1bc497110467f7c8df20e2203de458b3.pdf
  6. Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. Yale University Press.
  7. Diamond, L. (1999). Developing democracy: Toward consolidation. JHU Press.
  8. Evans, G., & Whitefield, S. (1995). The politics and economics of democratic commitment: Support for democracy in transition societies. British Journal of Political Science, 25(4), 485-514. https://www.jstor.org/stable/194130 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007328
  9. Guoping. (2016, February 4). "Yi ren min wei zhong xin" kai pi wei da shi ye xin jing jie--lun xi jin ping zong shu ji zhi guo li zheng xin si xiang xin cheng jiu [""People-centered" opens up a new realm of great cause--On the new achievements of General Secretary Xi Jinping's new thoughts on governance]. Xinhuanet. http://www.xinhuanet.com//politics/2016-02/04/c_128703467.htm
  10. Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the global order: From the modern state to cosmopolitan governance. Stanford University Press.
  11. Held, D. (2006). Models of democracy. Stanford University Press.
  12. Hu, F. (1998). Zheng zhi wen hua yu zheng zhi sheng huo [Political culture and political life]. Sanmin Publishing Co., Ltd.
  13. Inglehart, R. (1981). Post-materialism in an environment of insecurity. The American Political Science Review, 75(4), 880-900. https://doi.org/10.2307/1962290
  14. Nathan, A. J., & Ho, L. V. S. (1993). Chiang Chingkuo's decision for political reform. In S. C. Leng (Ed.), Chiang Ching-Kuo's leadership in the development of the Republic of China on Taiwan (pp.31-62). University Press of America.
  15. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge University Press.
  16. Rigger, S. (2004). Democratization in Greater China: Taiwan's best-case democratization. Orbis, A Journal of World Affairs by the Foreign Policy Research Institute, 48(2), 285-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orbis.2004.01.010
  17. Shen, H. (2016). Shi xi ying xiang liang an hu xin de yin su [Analysis of factors affecting cross-strait mutual trust]. Modern Taiwan Studies, 2, 6-12. https://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/48762818/shi_xi_ying_xiang_liang_an_hu_xin_de_yin_su_.htm
  18. Tang, W. (2016). Populist authoritarianism: Chinese political culture and regime sustainability. Oxford University Press.
  19. Tsang, S. (1999). Transforming a party state to a democracy. In S. Tsang and H. M. Tien (Eds.), Democratization in Taiwan: Implications for China (pp.1-22). Hong Kong University Press.
  20. Verba, S., & Almond, G. (1963). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Princeton University Press.
  21. Wang, S. (2013). Hu xin yu liang an guan xi he ping fa zhan :zhi du de fen xi [Mutual trust and peaceful development of the cross-strait relations: Institutional analysis]. Taiwan Research Quarterly, 5, 16-23. https://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/39732603/Mutual_Trust_and_Peaceful_Development_of_the_Cross.htm.
  22. Wu, H.-C. (2013) Evaluating the role of Confucian tradition in the prospects and limits of political change in four East Asian societies, [Doctoral thesis, Durham University]. Durham E-Theses Online. http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/6931/
  23. Yu, K. (2012). Wei hu zheng zhi ren tong yu hu xin ji chu shen hua liang an he ping fa zhan [Maintaining the foundation of political identity and mutual trust and deepening the peaceful development of cross-strait]. Taiwan Studies, 4, 1-4. https://caod.oriprobe.com/articles/45930581/wei_hu_zheng_zhi_ren_tong_yu_hu_xin_ji_chu____shen.htm