Confronting Discrimination and Inequality in China

Errol P. Mendes, Sakunthala Srighanthan

• Publisher: University of Ottawa Press
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9780776618111
• Topic: Ciencias sociales
• Subtopic: Discriminación y relaciones raciales

Confronting Discrimination and Inequality in China focuses on the most challenging areas of discrimination and inequality in China, including discrimination faced by HIV/AIDS afflicted individuals, rural populations, migrant workers, women, people with disabilities, and ethnic minorities. The Canadian contributors offer rich regional, national, and international perspectives on how constitutions, laws, policies, and practices, both in Canada and in other parts of the world, battle discrimination and the conflicts that rise out of it. The Chinese contributors include some of the most independent-minded scholars and practitioners in China. Their assessments of the challenges facing China in the areas of discrimination and inequality not only attest to their personal courage and intellectual freedom but also add an important perspective on this emerging superpower.

PART ONE
Discrimination against Rural and Migrant Workers

CHAPTER ONE
Prosperity at the Expense of Equality

Migrant Workers are Falling Behind in Urban China’s Rise¹

Wenran Jiang

In rapidly modernizing China, one of the major population groups that is not getting ahead is the huge army of 130 million migrant workers. China’s booming cities are very impressive: new skyscrapers, new apartment high rises, new roads, and ever-improving services and marketplaces. But without migrant workers, none of these are possible. Yet, migrant workers get low wages, work long hours, live in inferior conditions, receive little social welfare support, and are often subject to discrimination and unjust treatment. Since President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao came to power, they have put more emphasis on building a harmonious society. Premier Wen has personally intervened in the treatment of migrant workers. Thus, in recent years, the state of migrant workers has begun to receive substantial attention and to become an object of research.

In this paper, I approach the state of migrant workers and the discriminations they suffer from the following angles. First, I look at the potential for a social crisis in China. This part does not address the migrant workers in particular; rather, it addresses the overall situation of China’s modernization process and its impact and how social tensions may or may not increase. With high mobility, high expectations and large numbers, migrant workers will play a crucial role in shaping China’s social stability in the coming decades.

Second, I put the status of migrant workers in the broad context of the economy of China and its urban life. There are a lot of available materials, surveys and statistics available. I argue that there is enough evidence to show that migrant workers are being exploited, mistreated, discriminated against and marginalized. There are also a lot of proposals for how to improve the situation of the migrant workers. There are even policies and measures taken by the central and local governments to change the situation, address many of the grievances of migrant workers and implement some pilot projects to further improve their social and economic conditions. But none of these has so far made any qualitative change in the position of migrant workers in the Chinese economy and society.

Third, I argue that in order to win in the fight for migrant workers’ rights and to accord migrant workers the treatment they deserve, more profound changes are needed. It is not only in some concrete policy areas that more efforts shall have to be made; rather, China must go through a paradigm shift in its overall development strategies. In the past three decades, the Chinese government, for the purposes of rapid modernization and “catching-up” with the West, has pursued a traditional development paradigm involving capital-intensive, resource-intensive, labour-intensive, pollution-intensive and low value-added manufacturing-intensive industrialization based on China’s abundant supply of cheap labour. For China to narrow the growing income gaps between the urban centres and the countryside, between urban residents and migrant workers, Beijing should make strategic adjustment in all the above areas, as it is only by so doing that China can finally solve its “migrant workers problem.”

I. THE DYNAMICS OF CHINA’S SOCIAL CRISIS

China continues to impress the world with its high GDP growth, staggering trade volumes and surging appetite for consumption. Most figures out of Beijing are remarkable, indicating that the Middle Kingdom is reclaiming its great power status at a speed faster than most had previously forecast. Yet evidence is mounting that its development paradigm focused on high GDP growth shall be too costly to sustain indefinitely: rural, urban and environment-related protest movements are coalescing from local and isolated events into a more widespread and serious social crisis.

1. What do statistics, or the lack of them, indicate?

Some may point to Beijing’s high-ranking GDP figures as proof of China’s successful modernization: its national economy is about to overtake that of Germany to become the third largest in the world,² and it is projected to overtake that of Japan in the coming years; its economic structure seems to be more balanced than it had been previously with a larger service sector; and China’s foreign trade grew by double-digits in recent years and its foreign reserves are now the largest in the world. Yet other recently released numbers, which have received less coverage, indicate another, more troublesome trend.

As revealed by the China Human Development Report 2005, regional disparities are threatening the country’s overall growth potential, and the widening gap between urban and rural wealth and well-being has reached a dangerous level. Compiled by a group of Chinese researchers for the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the report demonstrates that in all major categories of the human development index (HDI) – from per capita income to life expectancy to literacy rate – regional imbalances are severe and growing. It concludes that China’s Gini coefficient, a measurement of a country’s income inequality, has increased by more than 50 percent in the past 20 years, with urban dwellers earning nearly four times that of rural residents. At 0.46, “China’s Gini coefficient is lower than in some Latin American and African countries, but its urban-rural income inequality is perhaps the highest in the world.”³

The higher GDP numbers only make inequality worse, and when systemic factors biased against the rural population are included, China’s city to countryside income ratio is as high as 6:1.⁴ The result is that a person in richer cities enjoys a life expectancy of close to 80 years, the level of a middle-income country and ten to fifteen years longer than a farmer’s life span in Tibet or other remote provinces. The UNDP report also shows that the inland regions lag behind in education, especially among the female population.⁵

Only two decades ago, China was one of the most equitable societies on earth. Today, it ranks 90th in the UNDP’s 131-nation HDI. It is ironic that while 250 million people have been lifted out of poverty in record time – a proud achievement that no one denies – China is also leading the world in creating one of the most unequal societies in history.

2. How to measure social stability, or the lack of it?

The Chinese government has repeatedly told the world that it needs social stability to develop its economy, and Beijing claims to value economic and social rights more than political rights. The question is thus whether China’s traditional political control can be accepted as a model of development by the very people who are now excluded from China’s growing prosperity.

The last report the Chinese government released regarding social protest cited 87,000 incidents of “public order disturbances” in 2005, up 6.6 percent from the 74,000 figure in 2004; the number of events that “interfered with government functions” jumped 19 percent while protests seen as “disturbing social order” grew by 13 percent in 2005.⁶ Some say this is an alarming acknowledgement of the looming crisis in Chinese society that may soon tear China apart, with unthinkable consequences. Others contend that the figure is not surprising and that it may not even be a new development, and that it reflects only the fact that Beijing now allows more reporting of these protests that have long existed. The Chinese government even puts this spin on reports of social disorder, claiming that China is now more democratic by allowing the protests to occur and then informing the public about them.

Despite the differences in assessment, the emerging consensus is that various grassroots protests are increasing in numbers, are becoming better organized, and often turn violent when local officials are no longer seen to be working to resolve ordinary peoples’ legitimate grievances. Such protest movements are gaining wider social acceptance. Again, the UNDP Report’s survey of the Chinese public’s perception of income distribution gaps reveals a popular appetite for social justice and potential support for radical actions: more than 80 percent of those surveyed believe that China’s current income distribution is either “not so equitable” or “very inequitable.”

Meanwhile, a recent global study by the Pew Global Attitude Project seems to contradict such pessimism. It shows that the Chinese in recent years are the happiest that they have been due to their improved standards of living, and that they are now more optimistic about their future than they have been in recent years. Seventy-two percent of Chinese, the highest among sixteen countries polled, expressed satisfaction with national conditions. Although the survey acknowledges that the “sample is disproportionately urban and is not representative of the entire country,” its results convey one important message not recognized in the data analysis of the pollsters: the people of China have extremely high expectations about benefiting from the country’s ongoing economic expansion; if these high expectations are not met in the near future, however, their frustration with inequitable income distribution may turn to demands for equity and social justice.

From the 1950s to the 1970s most Chinese were very poor but relatively equal; social protests were rare and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) asserted control with little concern regarding large scale grassroots unrest. Today’s China, after more than two decades of reform, is much more prosperous but at the same time a very unequal society. Historical experiences show that when a country is embarking on rapid economic growth, social mobility accelerates and people’s expectations for their own share of the prosperity increase. Yet, at the same time, income distribution gaps widen and, with few exceptions, only a small portion of the population enjoys the benefits of the country’s modernization drive. Such a paradoxical process often results in rising resentment among the populous and leads to large scale protests for a more equitable distribution of wealth. China today is at such a crossroads characterize by unprecedented prosperity, high and unmet expectations, and growing frustration with perceived social injustice.

3. When will the “tipping point” come, if ever?

The current Chinese leadership, headed by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, is keenly aware of the growing disparity and its serious consequences. After years of promoting Deng Xiaoping’s famous call “to get rich is glorious,” now it is the “harmonious society” that seems to have become the central pillar of the Hu-Wen approach to easing China’s social tensions. Despite a number of measures – ranging from investment in remote regions to elimination of agricultural taxes to “hard strikes” against corruption – social unrest is on the rise. With some of the recent bloody confrontations between peasants and local authorities, many wonder if some kind of a “tipping point” for a social crisis will arrive soon – a potentially explosive situation in which large scale upheavals could shake the entire Chinese political, economic, and social establishment.

Revolutions, for example the Russian Revolution of 1917, tend to be precipitated by three conditions: first, the masses can no longer be governed; second, the ruling elite can no longer govern; and third, the social forces are fully mobilized under the leadership of a revolutionary party to overthrow the existing regime. According to these conditions, China is nowhere close to a revolutionary “tipping point.”

Yet it would be a profound mistake to take comfort from such abstract conclusions. The state of the first two conditions has been progressively deteriorating in recent years: widespread social protests are increasing and the corruption of government and CCP officials together with the plight of ordinary citizens have combined to weaken the governance structure. A deadly combination of these two elements could lead to a widespread belief that the majority of the population is left behind because of corrupt officials and the privileged few who have enriched themselves through exploitation at the expense of the masses. This perception may foster pressures that fundamentally reconfigure the existing social, economic, and political order.

This process may well be accelerated if the inevitable economic slowdown in the coming years occurs simultaneously with natural, environmental and other human-generated ecological disasters. An externally-imposed, alternative political mechanism is unlikely, if possible at all, given China’s tightly controlled conditions. Yet a governance crisis of such magnitude is likely to trigger an internal split within the CCP ruling elite, with reform-oriented forces openly confronting hardliners who advocate total control by force. If history tells us anything about large scale social turmoil, it is that a total breakdown of society may not help in solving China’s pressing problems. Thus, the great challenge for China, and by extension the world, is that of how to avoid such a dangerous internal “showdown” with reforms that effectively address the issue of income inequality, social injustice and lack of democratization.

II. THE STATUS OF CHINA’S MIGRANT WORKERS

It is in such a broader context that I shall examine the status and the treatment of China’s migrant workers, and explore how continuous discrimination against such a large social group will risk China’s political, economic and social stability in the long term. Premier Wen Jiabo specifically instructed in-depth research on migrant workers and related issues in February 2005, and since then the State Council has done some extensive studies.

1. China’s migrant workers 101

According to the Report on the Problems of Chinese Farm-turned Workers by the Chinese Farm Workers Research Group of the State Council, farm workers are a special concept in China’s economic and social transitional period. They are peasants in their household identity, have designated land rights in their home village, but work in the non-agricultural sector and have their main income from wages. The narrowly defined farm workers are those who leave home and enter urban areas to work. The broadly defined farm workers include not only those who go to the cities to work, but also those agrarian workers who work in the manufacturing and service industries in the counties near their homes. Currently, there are about 130 million migrant workers in the narrowly defined category and about 200 million nationwide if using the broadly defined standards.⁷

I agree with the Report’s conclusion that the development of China’s migrant workers has gone through three historical phases. The first phase marks a transition from free movement to strong control, and lasts from the early 1950s to early 1980s. It is essential to understand that the origin of the division between the urban and rural regions began in 1958, when the government issued the household reg...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Contributors
• Editors’ Note
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part One: Discrimination Against Rural and Migrant Workers
• Part Two: Discrimination against Women
• Part Three: Discrimination against the Disabled
• Part Four: Discrimination against those Living with HIV/AIDS
• Part Five: Discrimination Against Minorities