China's real rise – in Wukan's village election

Chinese residents in the coast village of Wukan rebelled last year and won the right to a free election. The rest of China watches to see if they, too, can demand democracy.

David Gray/Reuters
Lin Zuluan, who led protests in the Chinese village of Wukan, is followed by the media Dec. 21. He was named the new head of the village on Jan, 15 by provincial leaders in a concession to the protesters.

China’s leaders claim their country is simply too big, too unique, and far too prone to chaos for them to allow democracy. Yet on Wednesday, a surprisingly free election takes place in Wukan, a coastal village of 15,000. It has caught the eye of many freedom-hungry Chinese.

The village election in Guangdong Province gives some hope that the world’s most populous nation might yet defy the Communist Party’s stereotype of the Chinese as unprepared to self-govern. This could be a Tunisian moment for the Middle Kingdom.

Wukan is just one of thousands of places in China where residents have recently rebelled against local injustices – the corruption, violence, and land grabs of party officials and their business cronies. Most revolts are either suppressed or quietly resolved. Few of them end up making a link between China’s rising injustices and its lack of democracy and independent judiciary.

But not in Wukan. Residents there took over the village for 10 days late last year because of official graft and the killing of a local man by police. They expelled party leaders and security forces from the village.

Instead of suppressing the protest, however, the province’s reform-minded party leader, Wang Yang, made a surprising concession. He allowed the chief rebel, Lin Zuluan, to assume power and arrange a popular vote. Wednesday’s election sets up a committee to supervise an election of village representatives. Volunteers have been going door-to-door to solicit votes.

“The public’s awareness of democracy, equality, and rights is constantly strengthening, and their corresponding demands are growing,” said deputy provincial party secretary Zhu Mingguo. He and his boss say they expect Wukan to be a template for elections throughout the province.

Elections are a device to hold rulers accountable, an idea now common throughout the world. And yet still feared by a Communist Party in Beijing that assumes its legitimacy derives simply from its support of rapid economic growth.

Wukan’s moment of freedom may end up being suppressed or co-opted. One election does not make an Arab Spring. But without democracy, injustices in China can only grow as people find little to check official abuse. It’s worth recalling that more than half the American Declaration of Independence was simply a list of grievances against the crown.

Many Chinese watched last month’s elections in Taiwan with eager fascination. Some top Chinese businessmen visited the island to witness democracy in action. A party newspaper, Global Times, admitted that many mainland Chinese asked: “Why can’t the same style of elections be held here?”

Wukan’s newfound freedom has inspired other villages to wonder if they can be next. With the help of the Internet, a rice-roots movement could easily spread as more Chinese throw off the self-limiting notion that they are not ready for the rough-and-tumble of open politics, as in Taiwan. That island nation has disproved the theory that a hierarchy-minded Confucian society can’t be democratic.

China’s next party leader, Xi Jinping, visits the White House on Feb. 14, Valentine’s Day. Will he have the heart to acknowledge that Wukan represents a victory for China? And if not, will Mr. Xi be the last unelected leader of China?

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to China's real rise – in Wukan's village election
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today