A_05 Social Cohesion in China – Traditions and New Challenges
Projects
- Sections:
- Leipzig
- Disciplines:
- History , Cultural Studies , Political Science , Sociology
Abstract
The Communist Party of China (CPC) regards securing social cohesion among 1.4 billion people as one of its greatest achievements. But what understanding of cohesion underlies this claim? How does it respond to crises? This work package examines how social cohesion is politically produced in authoritarian China and what role it plays in the legitimacy of the regime.
Our research assumes that the legitimacy of the Chinese government is closely linked to the construction of social cohesion. In addition to repressive measures, the government seeks to strengthen citizens’ trust in its leadership through a collective sense of belonging. These cohesion policies are intended to safeguard the stability of the system.
The work package combines historical and contemporary perspectives. It analyzes how China designs its cohesion policies and how successful they are among the population. It also examines the effects of this model on neighboring Asian states that are dependent on China in many respects. In this context, the Chinese understanding of community and collective cohesion is considered an alternative to the individualism-shaped Western approach. Comparative analyses of survey data provide insight into whether these conceptions are already spreading across the region.
Transfer Activities
We also aim to make our research accessible through podcasts. To this end, we conduct interviews with experts who shed light on the significance of social cohesion in China. Central to our work is the question of how the Chinese understanding of cohesion differs from Western conceptions of democratic cohesion.
The Communist Party of China (CPC) claims that one of its greatest achievements lies in securing social cohesion within the Chinese nation of 1.4 billion people. Not infrequently, the concept of democracy is invoked in the same breath, even though, from an external perspective and according to democracy indices, China is clearly classified as an autocracy (V-Dem 2024). This raises the question of what understanding and configuration of social cohesion we encounter in China and how it responds to crises. Over the past roughly forty years, China’s economic development has gone hand in hand with social inequality, a widening gap between rich and poor, and environmental degradation. All of these developments carry the risk of social dislocation and unrest, which may help explain why references to social cohesion appear so frequently in the official discourse of the Chinese government. The authorities’ main strategy for constructing social cohesion increasingly consists in positioning the state as the sole source of truth and criminalizing dissenting opinions. Accordingly, this (presumably) reflects a homogenizing understanding of cohesion that functions differently from democratic cohesion.
The case study, which is embedded in a comparative approach, examines how social cohesion in authoritarian China has been and continues to be achieved through deliberate cohesion policies—and what significance it holds for the legitimacy of the autocratic regime. In doing so, the work package (WP) connects to the questions of Focus Area 2 of the research area, which foreground the construction and production of social cohesion by state institutions. The WP analyzes how social cohesion in China is built by the state and used by the state to silence dissenting voices and enforce political consensus, particularly with regard to state violence (political persecution). This raises the question of whether China represents a prototypical case of authoritarian cohesion and whether Chinese cohesion policies, given China’s position of power in the Asian region, serve as a model for other countries.
Existing research indicates that the legitimacy of the Chinese government is a strong driving force behind the construction of social cohesion. In line with the guiding questions of Focus Area 2, a strong relationship is assumed between (authoritarian) cohesion and the legitimacy of the Chinese system. Through enforced collectivism, social cohesion becomes an instrument of social repression. At the same time, the cohesion of Chinese society is presented as superior to that of democratic societies. The study of the political production and instrumentalization of cohesion in authoritarian China thus provides an important point of contrast for the entire research area vis-à-vis research on democratic cohesion in liberal societies. Identifying the differences—and possibly also the similarities—between these forms of cohesion is another question that will guide our work.
