Working with China to Promote Democracy
China represents an uncomfortable thorn in U.S. efforts to promote democracy around the world. While some projects have been successful, a large gap exists between the increasing U.S. funding in China and its "limited impact." Moreover, U.S. democracy promotion in China has contributed to strategic distrust between China and the United States; Beijing perceives it as a strategic move to destabilize the rise of China and sabotage the Communist Party's leadership. At the same time, China's growing power while maintaining one-party rule and rejecting democratic change generates fear and distrust among many Americans.
The Chinese Political Opposition in Exile: A Chequered Development
Abstract Deploying the perspectives of diaspora politics and transnational social movements, this article analyses the impact of the key factors conditioning the overall environment in which the overseas Chinese democracy movement (OCDM) has operated since the 1989 Tiananmen event in Beijing (where weeks of mass protest rallies by students, intellectuals, workers, and citizens led to a violent crackdown by the People’s Liberation Army on the demonstrators on 4 June). China’s phenomenal rise as a global power, its transformed relations with the West and diaspora communities, and its toughening control over political dissent inside and outside the country have created an increasingly arduous and complex mobilising terrain for the dissidents in exile. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s democratisation, political nativisation, and China-focused economic exchanges have minimised Taipei’s role as the mainland exiles’ traditional backer. Finally, the shifting norms, demographics, and practices of the overseas Chinese diasporas have further compounded these challenges.
History, criminology and the ‘use’ of the past
This article considers why, despite an apparent congruence of subject matter and methodologies, the disciplines of sociological criminology and criminal justice history are not more closely aligned. It contends that intellectual traffic between the two fields is not usually limited by institutional barriers, nor is it a legacy of the disciplinary antipathy which existed between history and sociology in Britain during the mid-twentieth century. Rather, it is due to the different ‘purposes’ with which sociological criminologists and criminal justice historians imbue their work and to the differing disciplinary perceptions of the relationship between the past, present and future which result from this. These different ‘purposes’ are traced via a consideration of the paths of development of the two disciplines from the 1940s. The article concludes by proposing an arena for future collaboration between criminal justice historians and sociological criminologists.