Economic prosperity or democracy: Dilemma of development in Hong Kong and China

After Hong Kong is integrated with mainland China in July 1997, the economic and political environments of the two places will inevitably link up with each other. Economic modernization significantly not only improves the living conditions of the Chinese, but also alters their social structure and political values. As such, economic prosperity and democracy become the two conflicting values in Hong Kong and China during the transition to 2000. The people of Hong Kong and China are presented a choice over two mutually exclusive targets: economic prosperity vs. democracy. On the one hand, the choice for economic prosperity will imply no democracy because a conservative political system will be maintained to preserve the political status quo. On the other hand, the choice for democracy will imply no economic prosperity, because democratization will be suppressed and hence the economy will suffer as a result of political instability. However, neither of these two choices could offer the people of Hong Kong and China a genuine prosperity and stability. Therefore a congruent relationship between the economy and the political system must be established and maintained. As prosperity is contributed by both economic growth and political stability, neglection of either of these two elements will not result in a long‐lasting prosperity. Thus, economic development and democratization are two complementary rather than contradicting forces on the road to development in China.     

Weber and ‘legitimate domination’: a theoretical critique of Weber's conceptualisation of ‘relations of domination’ ∗

In this paper it is argued that Weber cannot provide a consistent account of the maintenance of systems of ‘legitimate domination’. This argument is based upon an examination of Weber's fundamental concepts of ‘actio’ and ‘behaviour’ and their theoretical relation to Weber's ‘ideal-typical’ approach to the phenomenon of ‘domination’. Through this examination it may be seen that Weber fails to determine the specific ‘natural’ and ‘social’ conditions of forms of domination. Furthermore, Weber's theoretical position can be seen to result in an implicit attempt to combine irreconcilable ‘natural’ and ‘ideal’ forms of determination.