On the other hand, it is not surprising that authoritarian regimes like China struggle to establish the rule of law. Francis Fukuyama described China`s legal system as the rule of law. My cadre interprets the dominant institution in China as the Communist Party (CCP). The capacity of the state in China remains surprisingly weak. In fact, the CCP keeps them weak through its control over coercive apparatus such as the People`s Liberation Army. Xi Jinping has far more authority in his role as chairman of the CCP than as president of China. Looking at his history, it is remarkable to discover that Deng Xiaoping was never president of China. Mao Zedong was chairman for only four years. The position has little power.
Technically, it is the prime minister who governs the state, not the president. Of course, the real political power lies in the CCP. Clark sees hegemony not only as a concept of American hegemony, but as a legitimate institution of international society in which rights and duties are transferred to the hegemonic state. Shows that hegemony has historically taken various forms, including that of a single state and a coalition of states. Not all students accept this depoliticization – the student “body” is by no means homogeneous and students should not simply be understood as passive recipients. Some are suspicious of the role of the law. But often, they learn to deal with this suspicion, to lock it into their private lives – it is seen as having no place in the professional and legal realm (Kennedy 1982, p. 1). 608).12xKennedy has already mentioned this in an article he wrote while a student at Yale Law School: “The division of life into hermetically sealed `private` (emotional) and `public` (effective) compartments must lead to distortions in both areas.” (Kennedy 1970-1971, pp. 77, 78). So even students who might have a potential political agenda are storing this for a space outside the law.
The law formalizes social identities so that whenever there is rule of law, people trust their equality, even if they occupy a subordinate position as a student, employee or even volunteer. It limits the extent of their consent to authority. Indeed, political leaders face limitations on their power by law, even when they have the power to create new laws and repeal old ones. But when the rule of law does not exist, it formalizes hierarchy and broadens the context of social subordination. It is not enough to apply the law consistently. The rule of law refers to its institutional hegemony, which requires the elimination of hierarchies in a broader social context. In international politics, hegemony refers to the domination or authority exercised by one state or group of states over others. Hegemony is at once material, ideal and relational. Hegemonic States generally enjoy a preponderance of material capabilities, both military and economic. They also establish the legitimacy of a particular type of international, regional or global order that reflects and reinforces their national values and interests. Hegemonic states set and enforce the rules of the international game. But hegemony is not simply coercion; It also implies a significant degree of tolerance on the part of other important states in the system.
Hegemony implies authority; The dominant state exercises it and other states accept it, at least to some extent. Managers need followers or employees. Hegemony works best when other states accept the leading role of the hegemonic state and see the order it creates as beneficial and desirable. Hegemony must be distinguished analytically from unipolarity. The latter term refers to a distribution of material capabilities in which one state is clearly superior to all others. Unipolarity does not imply anything special in the relations between states in the system. Hegemony must also be distinguished from empire. Empire refers to a formal relationship between domination and dependence.
Hegemonic relations are probably informal rather than formal, although they are usually institutionalized in a way that reflects the authority of the dominant power. The scientific literature on hegemony is vast and deep. It contains analyses and comparisons of various hegemonic orders, in particular the 19th century order associated with British hegemony and the order of American hegemony after World War II.