Dave, I really share your hope.
But what I'll never understand is how is possible that so many people are still so inclined to trust the official statements of a communist despot whose words are systematically disproved by everyday reality.
If democracy arrives (and will arrive), it will be in spite of CCP, not because of.

Best.

Enzo

Hi Enzo, the thing is, though, that five years ago they'd never have even dreamed of saying that. That alone is a change worth celebrating.

Dave,

Great post. It may takes some time but I think what they realize what is the right thing to do.

(note the media often remind us that Wen was beside Zhao ziyang on TAM, May18, 1989)

Quite right HKDave that 5 years ago under JZM they wouldn't have said that, but of course fifteen to twenty years ago under first HYB and then ZZY, they were saying exactly the same things as Wen said this past week. Its back to the future time in the PRC. Or perhaps more accurately, picking up where those leaders were at before they were ousted.

Singapore-based Zaobao said Chinese official media did not report Wen's statement......

Dylan, points well made. It is really frustrating to see how political leaders in China never really learn from history. The Empress Dowager Cixi crushed the "Hundred Day Reform" and forced Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao into exile. A decade later, she adopted most of the measures that Kang and Liang intended to introduce in a desparate attempt to resurrect the Qing Empire from her inevitable fate of destruction. As yet, it was too little too late. I hope that the PRC government today under the leadership of Wen and hu are not reenacting the same old sad drama again.

I realize there are plenty of grounds for pessimism, but it does seem as though these statements have gone further even than those made by the CCP officials in the 1980s, at least during non-crisis periods. I would also argue that the situation today in China is far better than that faced by the Chinese leadership, such as it was, under the rudderless helmswomanship of the Empress Dowager Ci Xi. In fact, you may want to refer to my own blog today for commentary on that particular lady and the anniversary of the American-led 'Open Door' policy in China.

Amazing stuff, good find, Dave. I agree that even mentioning this is a big step forward. However I can also understand the worry that this is merely paying lip service to the idea of democracy. Is it merely jockeying in some hidden power play between "reformers" and "conservatives". The irony is China's leadership debates these things, if at all, behind close doors.

The implications of Wen's statement would make interesting work for the CCP theorists. If democracy is inevitable, what of the CCP's place within it? Are we talking Egypt style democracy or Western?

In other words, not all democracies are equal. It's what democracy translates to on the ground that matters. It's not just voting. It's rule of law, corruption free Government, free press and speech, working and honest courts. That's likely not what Wen has in mind.

Simon, I quite agree with you, I am sure that democracy as we know it in the West is not what Wen has in mind, any more than the 2% revaluation was what the US wanted.:) I'm sure the democracy he is considering is going to be more limited than Singapore's, for example, and is not going to extend to positions at the highest level in the Central government anytime soon.

But clearly the leadership is reacting to real or perceived pressure to reform governance, and a willingness to consider what is a radical solution internally for appointing government at a local level. How far or how fast it goes, it is hard to say, but the fact that they are re-considering a solution that was anathema to them until very recently is remarkable.

It is about placing the ability to replace useless, venal and corrupt local officials in the hands of the local population. In a best case scenario, I am sure, for the CCP, it will serve as a model for how to reform government at a higher level, and also serve as a recruiting engine for the party. In a worst case scenario, they at least will manage to deflect blame for bad local government from Beijing.

I think it is important to remember that democracy with a universal franchise took over a century to establish itself in the United States and in most Western countries - Switzerland only gave women the vote a generation ago. These things take time, and democracy and the values that make it successful - civic participation, belief in equality, civil rights and in using political participation to advance one's own interests - does not come overnight. This is why I believe this ever-so-slight crack of light in the doorway should be applauded and supported rather than dismissed cynically.

I don't cynically dismiss it at all. I merely point out that Wen and Hu's recent statements have a lineage that goes back decades, and are not some sudden "discovery" that changes everything. Maybe they will succeed where HYB and ZZY failed, lets hope they do.

Sorry Dylan, I was in a hurry and used the word 'cynically' instead of 'skeptically'. Statements of liberalism should rightly be taken with a grain of salt when made in a foreign language at a meeting outside of the country. But given how carefully Chinese senior party officials word their statements, I think that these words nevertheless provide some grounds for optimism after a lapse of almost two decades and after 1989 was thought to have definitively ended any progress on this front.

But yes, we should not be putting on the party hats yet, on that I think we both agree.:)