Middle Class China

Middle Class China

Identity and Behaviour

CSC China Perspectives series

Edited by Minglu Chen and David S.G. Goodman

A general expectation has developed that China’s middle class will generate not only social but also political change. This expectation often overlooks the reality that there is no single Chinese middle class with a common identity or will to action. This timely volume examines the behaviour and identity of the different elements of China’s middle class – entrepreneurs, managers, and professionals – in order to understand their centrality to the wider processes of social and political change in China.

Chapter 6: Homeowners’ movements: narratives on the political behaviours of the middle class

Jean-Louis Rocca

Subjects: asian studies, asian development, asian politics and policy, development studies, asian development, politics and public policy, asian politics


The ‘middle classes’ have become a hot topic in Chinese society. Researchers, officials and journalists have largely adopted the idea that China needs a strong middle class to pursue modernization. Admittedly, points of view are diverse concerning the definition of this group of people – in terms of level of income and education, type of job, lifestyle and relationship with the state, but everybody agrees on the tasks it has to assume: to stimulate domestic consumer demand, to raise the quality of the population, to introduce modern lifestyles and to contribute to political change (Li, 2006; Goodman, 2008a; Rocca, 2008, 2009). The middle class is supposed to be the only force that can contribute efficiently to democratization. It is an idealistic class, conscious of its rights and ready to defend them but, at the same time, clearly opposed to any political clash. As it relies exclusively upon rational solutions to solve social and political conflicts, the middle class could play a vanguard role without jeopardizing social stability (Tsinghua daxue …, 2010). This understanding is supported explicitly and implicitly by modernization theory (Lipset, 1959, 1960; Rostow, 1960; Moore, 1966; Inkeles and Smith, 1975; Inglehart, 1997; Huntington, 2006), which considers that industrialization improves the likelihood of democratic transition by increasing the levels of education, by stimulating urbanization and occupational specialization. These phenomena contribute to the emergence of relevant political actors and create social pressure for democratization. Roughly speaking, during the stage leading up to modernity, economic growth is supposed to give birth to a new social class

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information