A Democracy That Works Western democracies have failed to address people’s livelihood concerns while the Chinese practice has made notable achievements

More than 200 scholars,researchers,former government o!cials and party leaders from over 50 countries gathered in the sprawling building of the Chinese Academy of History in Beijing on 20 March for the third International Forum on Democracy:The Shared Human Values.The forum debated the concept of democracy,its trajectories and prospects,and,more importantly,how it can be made to work and deliver tangible results for di"erent countries.

The Core of the Chinese Democracy Is to Respect and Protect Human Rights——A Summary of the Academic Seminar on Chinese Democracy and Human Rights Protection

On March 26,2023,a Seminar on Chinese Democracy and Human Rights Protection was held,jointly organized by the National Human Rights Education and Training Base and the Human Rights Research Center of Central South University under the guidance of the Chinese Society for Human Rights Studies.The event adopted a combination of online and offline channels.Over 30 experts and scholars from universities,research institutions,and practical departments across the country participated in extensive discussions on“Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Chinese Democracy and Protection of Human Rights.”The seminar aimed to focused on the essence,characteristics,advantages,and human rights implications of Chinese democracy and interpreted the concept of Chinese democracy and the protection of human rights through academic and theoretical methods.

Inherent Features and Future Practice of Whole-Process People's Democracy from a Comparative Perspective

Democracy is a common value pursued by human society and is often viewed as an important symbol of the development level of a political civilization. However, after a review of the histories of different countries around the world。

Western Democracy:A Democracy in Distress

Western experts and scholars share their opinions about Western democracy and Chinese democracy at the Second International Forum on Democracy:The Shared Human Values.THE Summit for Democracy 2023 held on March 28 in the U.S.is the host country’s latest try to accuse other countries of being authoritarian,based on its own standard and the hegemonistic mindset.Is such an accusation well-grounded?Participants of the Second International Forum on Democracy,which concluded days earlier on March 23 in Beijing,beg to differ,including voices from some Western countries.

Human Rights in China:Exploration and Development of Whole-process People’s Democracy

Whole-process people’s democracy represents a new exploration of socialism with Chinese characteristics for a new era as well as a novel and important method for protecting the human rights of the Chinese people.It is conducive to solving a multitude of problems hindering the protection of civil rights and political rights.The greatest highlight of whole-process people’s democracy is that the people are the masters of their own country and exercise the power to govern the state through“extensive participation and consultation.”China’s experience and approaches in advancing whole-process people’s democracy provide a reference for other countries.

Reassessing Human Rights VS Democracy of the Public:A Necessary Challenge?

Today,we are witnessing a profound transformation of the dominant model of representative democracy which is increasingly giving way to a new form of democracy of the public,as Bernard Manin defined it.In a democracy of the public,parties tend to personalise themselves,becoming machines serving one particular person,who embodies public feelings.Participation and social organization within the territory are progressively replaced by a widespread communication and social media framework where the citizens become just passive spectators.To this,we must add that the spectacularisation of the current democratic systems,adopted to satisfy the audience,leads to negative effects on the protection of fundamental rights.This article will analyse the aspects that characterise the democracies of the public,and their social and legal effects on the consideration of human rights.The article goes further without being limited to this issue.In fact,it wants to emphasise the way human rights are crucial to bolstering democracies,rather than merely the other way around.Doctrines and politics have frequently emphasised the need for democracy,and,more specifically,the export of democracies to advance human rights.Contrarily,a shift in perspective is required in order to preserve liberal democracies.

Cosmopolitan Democracy and Democratic Public Law

Cosmopolitan democracy model is presented by David Held, beyond idealistic perspectives of left and right ideologies, mainly with a legal view, and found a global impact. As a prominent theorist in the field of democracy studies, David Held, by integrating the principle of autonomy in the model of constitutional democracy with the principle of participation in the model of participatory democracy, introduces a novel composition named ＂cosmopolitan democracy＂ that is a conception of democratic legal relations. Held is the first man who seeks to investigate democracy separated from the ideological models in relation to general human rights and identifies main areas of power in human life. He considers totally seven sets of rights necessarily enabling people to enjoy a free and equal participation in setting their communities. These rights include： right to health, welfare rights, cultural rights, civil rights, economic rights, political rights, and the right to enjoy a peaceful livelihood. Held＇s ultimate desire is to realize ideals of cosmopolitan democracy model in the global sphere, beyond the lessons of the West and the East. Through rethinking the theoretical and practical frameworks of this theory in today＇s world, the current paper seeks to study its role in reproducing democratic realism so that it would prepare the ground for the global consensus far from the ideal models.

The Construction of Mistake-tolerant Democracy Based on the Practical Right ＂Right to Trial and Error＂

The law ＂Trial and Error Ordinance＂ enacted in 2006 and spreading throughout China especially since 2016 is the best starting point for China＇s democratization, because Chinese government officials cannot be confronted with their new challenges directly without the right to trial and error. This study has tried to build a new democratic theory, mistake-tolerant democracy based on the right to trial and error with Chinese characteristics and Western value to guide Chinese democratized way. The right theory of mistake-tolerant democracy is the new right paradigm, ＂the right to trial and error as an original right and mutual empowerment theory＂ proposed by the combination of the state of nature and the scientific method of trial and error rather than natural right theory and social contract theory. Mistake-tolerant democracy emphasizes that the people have the equal right to trial and error as an original right, and the officials＇ right to trial and error are granted ＂from the people and should empower the corresponding rights to them, which is the meaning of mutual empowerment theory.

The Root Cause of the Failure of American COVID-19 Governance Based on the Criticism of Liberal Democracy From Error-Tolerant Democracy

Liberal democracy cannot help America govern COVID-19 effectively for liberalism’s misunderstanding of the concept of liberty.Error-tolerantism divides liberty into the right to liberty in innovative fields,the right to be wrong as an original right,and the right to be right in non-innovative ones as sub-rights;rights come from mutual empowerment among people.The major defects of liberal democracy from the perspective of error-tolerant democracy constructed on error-tolerantism are as follows:The essence of election is to transfer people’s right to be wrong and corresponding right to be right to politicians,but the separation and balance of powers does not evaluate whether presidents,states,mayors,et al.,have exercised the power to be wrong reasonably,so that they could even abuse it in the COVID-19 governance,and did great harm to people’s human rights without any accountability or impeachment.Democratic governor’power to be wrong authorized by election was deprived by President Trump through issuing false information in the COVID-19 governance and encouraging people to protest against the anti-pandemic laws,which made liberal democracy in the United States threatened and COVID-19 out of control.

A Prerequisite for the Successful Governance of COVID-19 in the United States:Expansion of Liberal Democracy From Politics to Economy

The failure of COVID-19 governance in the United States of America is closely related to its economic inequality.According to the theory of error-tolerant democracy,after reflecting on the American financial crisis of 2008,liberty should be redefined from mutual empowerment under the background of regulation,which means that rights to liberty of entrepreneurs and financial capitalists in the public economy are empowered by the people,so they should empower and benefit the people,corresponding to regulation and redistribution respectively.During the COVID-19 pandemic,empowering and benefiting the people regarded as economic democracy has not been realized for neoliberal policies,leading to insufficient public funds to help citizens badly hurt by the disease.To restore the U.S.as the beacon of democracy,it should undertake the historical mission:expansion of liberal democracy from politics to economy so as to reduce unreasonable economic inequality and protect rights to life of more infected Americans.

On the Crisis of Democracy

In the last three decades of the 20th century, important political changes occurred in all regions of the world, making the institutions of many existing political systems closer to the ideals of democracy. But as happened in other moments of history, those processes of democratization, even when successful, always occurred through advances and retreats. Thus, contemporary political practices, procedures, and institutions embody democratic ideals only partially. In many nations, in the present, the rule of law, civil, and political rights, and institutional mechanisms for citizens’ control of governments remain ineffective or underdeveloped. Thus, a double concern prevails among analysts: on the one hand, the regression to authoritarianism in some countries after the processes of political changes—Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Turkey being the paradigmatic examples;the emergence of semi-democracies, i.e., hybrid or illiberal regimes, which have provoked a new interest in the study of patterns of institutional design, the critical role of civil society, different political-cultural developments, authoritarian legacies in the context of the new democracies, competitive authoritarianism and new dictatorships. On the other hand, the acknowledgement of intrinsic limits of the historical development of the democratic regime even in the case of old democracies, i.e., the fact that political equality, active citizen participation, and effective control of abuse of power have never been fully realized in practice. This is the general context in which many analysts and part of the public opinion sustain that there is a crisis of democracy. The general diagnosis refers to the decreasing trust in political elites, political parties, parliaments, governments, and to the dissatisfaction with the regime among democrats;it refers also to the weaker and sometimes erratic performance of democratic institutions and particularly to the failure of the representative system. The picture is completed with the growing rates of partisan misalignment, electoral volatility, and declining civic participation. All this seems to indicate that democracy is inconceivable without crisis. This chapter discusses this scenario. The crisis of democracies is examined from a critical perspective, and the main objective is to understand the different dimensions of its nature and its consequences.

Idiosyncracies of Democracy： Islamic Societies

The supposedly unique impact of Islamic culture on democracy has been debated by various scholars. While some argue that it has a deleterious effect, others explain why its effect is not any more negative than other religions. Some even argue that there is no reason to assume Islam has a negative impact on democracy at all. The results of empirical studies are equally confusing. While some support the negative view of Islam, others actually demonstrate its positive effect on democracy. This article contributes to this debate by focusing its attention on the often-neglected distinction between electoral and liberal democracies, comparing Islamic societies with the rest of the world. Its findings demonstrate that the religion of Islam cannot be used to explain the seeming lack of the growth of democracy among Islamic societies.

Analyzing the Electoral Reform of the Chief Executive of Hong Kong： The Integration of Elite Democracy and Mass Democracy

According to a decision of the National People＇s Congress （NPC） Standing Committee of the People＇s Republic of China in 2007, the 2017 Chief Executive election can be implemented by universal suffrage. It caused a lot of conflicts in the Hong Kong society. Nevertheless, on August 31, 2014, the NPC Standing Committee came to the decision that a 1200-member Nominating Committee should elect two or three candidates before a territory-wide ballot by ordinary voters and the 2016 legislative election would remain unchanged. This decision detonated Umbrella Movement afterwards. Hong Kong Pan-democratic camp, in conflict with the government, proposed ＂party nomination＂ or ＂civil nomination＂. On June 18, 2015, the Legislative Council rejected this unmodified electoral reform proposal, which was uncommon under the ＂One Country, Two System＂. Hong Kong, as the Special Administrative Region, enjoys high-level autonomy, yet it can be influenced by the intervention of the Central Government. Analyzing the decision-making and intention of the Central Government regarding the electoral reform of the Chief Executive of Hong Kong will facilitate our understanding of the political development of Hong Kong in the near future. This paper argues that the design of the electoral reform will be critically important for the political development in Hong Kong. On the one hand, the Central Government has to follow the Basic Law, for example, Article 45, which stipulates the election procedure. On the other, it emphasizes that the Chief Executive pledges loyalty to Beijing, and only specific design of the electoral reform can guarantee it. The practice of democratic principles exists with the election of freedom and justice. Worldwide experience demonstrates various democratic election mechanism and system, none of which can apply to all societies. Democratic election development China's Mainland, Hong Kong Administration, and Macao Administration have difference in history. They should explore the democratic election mechanism, which takes root in and suits each cultural characteristics. As is well known, democracy relies on competition and compromise between conflicting principles and stakes. The election for the Chief Executive in Hong Kong of 2017 is a product of competition and compromise between different principles and stakes. This paper argues that the Chief Executive election of 2017 is a combination of elite democracy and mass democracy.

On the Process and Rights in the Whole-process People’s Democracy

Theoretically, the whole-process people’s democracy involves five processes, namely, political process, policy process, urban and rural community governance process, enterprises and institutions management process, and international exchange process. Fach process includes several links which involve different democratic rights. To comprehensively promote the whole-process people’s democracy, it is necessary to make a detailed distinction between the democratic rights of each process, build a corresponding system and mechanism for the protection of rights, improve the ability of people in democracy, and establish the system and mechanism for evaluating the effect of democracy implementation.

Solving the Century Problem“Modern Transformation of China’s Traditional Confucianism”—A Mistake-Tolerant Democracy Perspective

The reason why Chinese scholars cannot bridge between Confucianism and democracy as a century problem since 1920s is that liberal democracy has two fundamental defects:Human beings born with wisdom have known rights before entering societies,which is contrary to Confucianism;separation between politics and religions has led to religious ceremony of confession far away from politics.Mistake-tolerant democracy whose right theory is the right to trial and error as an original right and mutual empowerment theory can overcome above defects.Liberty is divided into the right to trial and error as an original right in innovative fields which can be transferred by contract and unalienable liberties in non-innovative ones.The spirit and behavior of self-criticism to people like confession is a virtue which meets Confucian moral requirements of becoming a Saint and politician’s obligation required in mistake-tolerant democracy,which can solve the century problem at utmost.

“Deliberative Democracy”的创新解析

"deliberative democracy"作为当代中西方共同关注的重要政治理论,恰当的中文译法对于该理论在中国的传播及发挥的启发作用影响极大。本文通过对目前汉语界对"deliberative democracy"的几种译法的分析,结合该理论的内涵意义,提出在中国政治语境下的恰当中文译法。

Chinese Enrichment and Development of Marxist Concept of Democracy in the New Era

Since the Eighteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China,Chinese communists,re-presented by President Xi Jinping,have innovated Marxist Concept of Democracy base on Chinese history,culture and conditions. On the basis of inheriting Marxist thought of the inner prescriptions of "people's democracy",they fur-ther expanded the connotation and extension of "rule by the people",developed the contents of the electoral democ-racy and consultative democracy in China.,enriched the concrete requirements of the democratic realization condi-tions from the aspects of economic foundation,intellectual support and the guarantee of the rule of law,and a new ex-ploration is made on the development of China's democratic political system from the aspects of Party's leadership and operation supervision.

Democracy

Democracy, a popular word with a variety of definitions, appears to be one of the core ideas in nowadays discussion of politics. Evolved from ancient Athens, it literally means 'rule by people'.

Democracy Development in Mongolia:Challenges and Opportunities

The modern democracy in Mongolia has changed from ideology and desires into the daily actions and real-life needs of achievement of the people.The content of this article aimed to categorizing the democracy development process and its challenges and opportunities in promoting democratic governance in Mongolia such brought specific approaches of the changes and difficulties.The contented of research article contextual approaches are characterized by own individual research data on democracy as basis on the use of the work and the independent research findings of the researcher.On the overview of process of uncut democracy consolidation and the democracy development in Mongolia managed to the most consistent principles and fundamental values of democracy up to second half of the 1990s.From the second half of the 1990s till the election in 2004,within this term,the following challenges and difficulties risen to action of slowing down that forming of political parties,grouped into fractional,blockage of post-trafficking,conspiracy,and to be corrupted and bribery as mentioned as newly adverse phenomena have begun to the democracy development.

Why Democracy is Its Own Worst Enemy？

The challenges that lay ahead for democracy are so serious that few political scientists have the courage to risk theirreputation and pin down with relative accuracy what will happen on a 5/10/15 year basis. As a matter of fact, whenthe term ＂democracy＂ and ＂enemy＂ is used in the same sentence there＇s a natural and immediate tendency---forthose who are lucky enough to live in electoral democracies---to look over the fence and not to our own backyard.That is to say, democracy＇s enemies, our enemies, are some sort of mythological creatures that live far away fi＇omour perfect democratic bubble. This reasoning can be in part seen in the on-going debate about democracy＇sstruggle against its external enemies. During the Cold War period democracy was at ＂war＂ with communism and,before that, with national-socialism and fascism. Currently, democracy faces new enemies： global authoritarianism,international terrorism, religious extremism, and Islamic fundamentalism. This thoughtfulness is only partly true.At least it＇s not the only reason why we are debating this matter today. According to this paper, and that＇s preciselypart of the problem, democracy is to some extent its own worst enemy. Why？ Because most of the issues that we＇redebating today are the result of a certain apathy and disentanglement of liberal democracies around the world in thelast decade.