“China will never have a Western-style democracy,” touts Li Dongsheng, the spokesman for the 17th Congress of the Communist Party. Considering that the congress meets only once every five years, Dongsheng’s vow carries heavy and long-term implications. Does this statement imply continued human rights abuses for Chinese workers? Or that freedom of speech will continue to be suppressed? In our pluralistic society, we learn to respect others’ opinions and practices, often with the stipulation that these differences shouldn’t inflict great harm on others.

Likewise, the citizens of every country should be able to choose their own path of governance. Swedes may want to run their country differently from the Japanese, and as long as neither country’s citizens want to command and conquer the other, both nations are willing to recognize mutual sovereignty. We should thus recognize and respect the decisions made by the citizens of China.

However, while respecting the decisions of other countries is prudent, it is important to distinguish between decisions made by a select few in power and decisions made by the populace at large. The former should be recognized on a case by case basis, while the latter should be taken to heart. This preferential treatment implies a sponsorship of democracies, which surfaces as a problem in regard to China. Will China at least become a more conservative type of democracy?

The answer seems to be yes. In support of political reform, Li Dongsheng has said that China would further nurture a form of “socialist democracy.” It is unlikely that he is referring to the European model of social democracy, where higher taxes are traded for more comprehensive public programs like universal health care and generous social security. He is hopefully referring to voting rights, free and fair elections and real legislative power for elected officials. These changes would be highly coveted in a country whose highest officials are chosen by means of patronage and long-lasting friendships between party elders and prodigies.

We are, however, somewhat cautious in predicting that China will become even a minimally defined democracy. While the notion of “social democracy” is upheld, the notion of a true multi-party political system is not. This resistance is, of course, not altogether surprising. Those in control rarely just surrender their monopoly on power. In its pursuit of “socialist democracy,” the Communist Party of China is instead wooing would-be dissidents into its grasp. Case in point: the inclusion of a non-Communist Party organization into the deliberative process and the suggestion that the newly rich class of Chinese businessmen be incorporated into the party network.

On the bright side, the party’s efforts to maintain control over the country may prove unable to stop the wave of democratization. As the economy charges full speed ahead, more and more Chinese citizens are enjoying life in a way that their predecessors could have only imagined. Priorities are shifting, and a new Chinese bourgeoisie may force more democratic change than the party would like to implement. That is why some reform is better than none at all.