¹ Lipset, Seymour Martin and Rokkan, Stein, Party Systems and Voter Alignments (New York: Free Press, 1967)Google Scholar.

² Lijphart, Arend, “Political Parties: Ideologies and Programs,” in Butler, David, Penniman, Howard R., and Ranney, Austin, eds., Democracy at the Polls: A Comparative Study of Competitive National Elections (Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1981)Google Scholar.

³ For example, see Dalton, Russell J., Flanagan, Scott C., and Beck, Paul Allen, eds., Electoral Change in Advanced Industrial Democracies: Realignment or Dealignmentf (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984)Google Scholar; Lijphart, Arend, “Religious vs. Linguistic vs. Class Voting,” American Political Science Review 73 (June 1979)Google Scholar; and Verba, Sidney, Nie, Norman H., and Kim, Jae-on, Participation and Political Equality: A Seven Nation Comparison (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

⁴ Inglehart, Ronald, Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Societies (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 273–78Google Scholar.

⁵ Conover, Pamela Johnston and Feldman, Stanley, “The Origins and Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications,” American Political Science Review 25 (November 1981)Google Scholar; and Feldman, Stanley and Zaller, John, “The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State,” American Journal of Political Science 36 (February 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶ Rosenberg, Shawn, “The Structure of Political Thinking,” American Journal of Political Science 32 (August 1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sniderman, Paul M. et al. , Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Zaller, John R., The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 26CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸ Klingemann, Hans D., “Measuring Ideological Conceptualizations,” in Barnes, Samuel H. et al. , Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1979), 229Google Scholar.

⁹ Ibid., 230.

¹⁰ Converse, Philip E., “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics,” in Apter, David E., ed., Ideology and Discontent (New York: Free Press, 1964)Google Scholar. But see Achen, Christopher H., “Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response,” American Political Science Review 69 (December 1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and In-glehart (fn. 4), chap. 3.

¹¹ Axelrod, Robert, “Where the Votes Come From: An Analysis of Electoral Coalitions, 1952–1968,” American Political Science Review 66 (March 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hibbs, Douglas A. Jr., “Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy,” American Political Science Review 71 (December 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lipset, Seymour Mart in, Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics, rev. ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopk ins University Press, 1981), 230–300Google Scholar; and McCloskey, Herbert and Brill, Alida, Dimensions of Tolerance: What Americans Believe about Civil Liberties (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1983), 370–414Google Scholar.

¹² Cognitive sophistication is also referred to as cognitive mobilization, cognitive ability, cognitive competence, and political sophistication, among other terms. Converse, Philip E., “Public Op inion and Voting Behavior,” in Greenste, Fred I. in and Polsby, Nelson W., eds., Handbook of Political Science, vol. 4 (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1975)Google Scholar; Inglehart, Ronald, “Cognitive Mobilization and European Identity,” Comparative Politics 3 (October 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lusk, Robert C. in, “Measuring Political Sophistication,” American Journal of Political Science 31 (November 1987)Google Scholar; Nie, Norman H., Verba, Sidney, and Petrocik, John R., The Changing American Voter, rev. ed. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979), 148–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sniderman et al. (fn. 6).

¹³ Page, Benjam in I. and Shapiro, Robert Y., The Rational Public: Fifty Yean of Trends in Americans' Policy Preferences (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), 315CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ Campbell, Angus et al. , The American Voter (1960; repr int, New York: John Wiley, 1980)Google Scholar, chaps. 9–10; Lerner, Daniel, The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East (New York: Free Press, 1958)Google Scholar; Rosenberg (fn. 6); Sniderman et al. (fn. 6); and Stimson, James A., “Belief Systems: Constra int, Complexity, and the 1972 Election,” 'American Journal of Political Science 19 (August 1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ Campbell et al. (fn. 14), 204.

¹⁶ Kraus, Richard Curt, Class Conflict in Chinese Socialism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ See, for example, Zedong, Mao, “Resolution on Certa in Questions in the History of Our Party,” in Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung, vol. 3 (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1965)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ [Zedong, Mao], Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1977)Google Scholar, 4:184.

¹⁹ Yan, Jiaqi and Gao, Gao, Wenhua dageming shinianshi (History of the ten-year cultural revolution), rev. ed., 2 vols. (Taipei: Yuanliu chuban shiye gufen youxian gongsi, 1990), 90–108Google Scholar.

²⁰ Ibid, 646–48; cf. Joseph, William A., The Critique of Ultra-Leftism in China, 1958–1981 (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1984)Google Scholar.

²¹ Ruan, Ming, Deng Xiaoping diguo (The empire of Deng Xiaoping) (Taipei: Shibao wenhua chuban shiye youxian gongsi, 1992)Google Scholar.

²² As seen in the book title, Lü, Wen (pseud.), Zhongguo “zuo” huo (China's “left” disasters) (Beijing: Chaohua chubanshe, 1993)Google Scholar.

²³ Link, Perry, Evening Chats in Beijing: Probing China's Predicament (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992)Google Scholar; Hsiao, Ching-chang and Yang, Mei-rong, “‘Don't Force Us to Lie’: The Case of the World Economic Herald,” in Lee, Chin-Chuan, ed., Voices of China: The Interplay of Politics and Journalism (York: Guilford Press, 1990)Google Scholar; and Judy Polumbaum, “The Tribulations of China's Journalists after a Decade of Reform,” in Chin-Chuan Lee.

²⁴ Li, Dong, “Public Op inion Polls and Political Attitudes in China, 1979–89” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1993), chap. 3Google Scholar.

²⁵ Cf. ibid., chap. 4.

²⁶ Hood, Marlowe, “Reflections on Civil Society, ‘Black Society,’ and Corruption in Contemporary China” (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, Boston, March 25–27, 1994)Google Scholar; Yang, Mayfair Mei-hui, Gifts, Favors, and Banquets: The Art of Social Relationships in China (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1994)Google Scholar.

²⁷ Ding, X. L., The Decline of Communism in China: Legitimacy Crisis, 1977–1989 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Goldman, Merle, Sowing the Seeds of Democracy in China: Political Reform in the DengXiaoping Era (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994)Google Scholar; and Link (fn. 23).

²⁸ Nathan, Andrew J., Chinese Democracy (New York: Knopf, 1985)Google Scholar.

²⁹ “On Questions of Party History: Resolution on Certa in Questions in the History of Our Party s ince the Founding of the People's Republic of China,” Beijing Review 24, no. 27 (July 6, 1981), 10–39Google Scholar.

³⁰ He, Baogang, “Three Models of Democracy: Intellectual and Moral Foundations of Liberal Democracy and Preconditions for Its Establishment in Contemporary China” (Ph.D. diss., Australian National University, 1993), 3, 257Google Scholar.

³¹ Li (fn. 24), chap. 6.

³² Because of our expectation that left-right concepts would not be meaningful to respondents, our 1990 survey did not include a measure of left-right self-placement. Our 1993 surveys in ma inland China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong included not only the issue priority battery reported here, but also a Chinese-traditionalism battery; a left-right placement battery for self, CCP, father, and KMT; and a number of other relevant questions (speed of reform and of social change, liberalism, civil liberties, democracy). We plan to use these questions to compare the dimensionality of Chinese political issues across the three Chinese political systems.

³³ As with similar questions commonly used in surveys in the West (e.g., Nie, Verba, and Petrocik [fn. 12]; Page and Shapiro [fn. 13]), we asked about issues we knew were on the public's mind. A technique used by researchers at National Taiwan University is to derive the issues they ask about from the platforms of candidates in election campaigns; see, e.g., Hu, Fu, “The Electoral Mechanism and Political Change in Taiwan,” in Tsang, Steve, ed., In the Shadow of China: Political Developments in Taiwan s ince 1949 (London: Hurst, 1993), 154–59Google Scholar. This reduces the risk that issues will be arbitrarily left off the list. Because of the lack of competitive elections in China, that option was not available to us. It should also be noted that this item was not designed to be used as we use it here, to test hypotheses about ideological dimensions. Nonetheless, it proved usable in this way.

³⁴ Besides Beijing, there were demonstrations in at least thirty other cities, but few are known to have occurred outside cities.

³⁵ Low expressed interest, in turn, may reflect an issue's lack of perceived salience to the respondent or the respondent's lack of information about the issue, or both. The difference between these two causes is not germane to the analysis here. Alternatively, one might hypothesize that “don't know” answers are given when an issue is politically too sensitive or dangerous to talk about honestly. In another article, however, one of us has demonstrated that this is not the case. “Don't know” responses are correlated with measures of respondents' cognitive deficiency rather than with measures of their political vulnerability. Shi, Tianjian, “Survey Research in China,” in ini, Michael X. Delli Carp, Huddy, Leoni, and Shapiro, Robert Y., eds., Research in Micropolitics, vol. 5, New Directions in Political Psychology (Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

³⁶ Factor analysis is best used to confirm the existence of dimensions that were theorized in advance. Otherwise, the risk is that almost any factor structure can be given a forced interpretation. As noted earlier, we did not have a theory of issue dimensions in mind when we constructed the list of issue we feel justified in proceeding to factor analysis. The validity of the factor analysis ga ins further credibility when the factor results prove to be meaningful with respect to other variables in the study, as in Table 3.

³⁷ There is no reason to expect all the items to cluster tightly around a given number of factors, since the list of items presented to respondents was not drawn up to test a theory of issue dimensions.

³⁸ The weak loading of “environment” and “consumer rights” on this factor may support Inglehart's suggestion that materialist and postmaterialist issues are dist inct in the public mind. But a separate factor analysis of these six items alone produced loadings on only one factor, not two. Six items may be too few to reveal the materialist-postmaterialist cleavage. “Type of household registration is not a measure of actual place of residence. However, those registered in the cities tend to live in cities, while those registered in rural areas either live in rural areas or are in the cities temporarily, without access to the privileges accorded urban residents. Potter, Sulamith He ins and Potter, Jack M., China's Peasants: The Anthropology of a Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, chap. 15.

⁴⁰ And except for the statistically insignificant relationship between foreign policy and household registration in Table 4, Table 4 is a better guide than Table 3 to the impact of age and sex on selection of agendas, because it shows their effects when other variables are controlled.

⁴¹ For similar arguments about the former USSR, see inifter, Ada W. F. and Mickiewicz, Ellen, “Redef ining the Political System of the USSR: Mass Support for Political Change,” American Political Science Review 86 (December 1992)Google Scholar; and Miller, Arthur H., Hesli, Vicki L., and Reisinger, William M., “Reassessing Mass Support for Political and Economic Change in the Former USSR,” in American Political Science Review 88 (June 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴² These sets of questions touch on what Flanagan calls the “authoritarian-liberal” dimension. Our questions are not the same as his because we designed the questionnaire to collect information on public attitudes to certa in specific issues of concern to us. Our 1993 questionnaire includes a “traditionalism” battery that incorporates some of Flanagan's items and others analogous to his. Flanagan, Scott, “Value Change in Industrial Societies,” American Political Science Review 81 (December 1987)Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Nathan (fn. 28); this interpretation ga ins support from the fact that the same constituency supports pro-democratic attitudes and the Tiananmen Agenda, as we are about to show.

⁴⁶ We acknowledge the possibility that respondents were afraid to withhold agreement from this proposition, s ince CCP leadership is one of Deng Xiaoping's “four basic pr inciples,” which every Chinese citizen is supposed to support. This analysis should not be taken to imply that Chinese political culture is inhospitable to democratization; cf. Nathan, Andrew J. and Shi, Tianjian, “Cultural Requisites for Democracy in China: F indings from a Survey,” Daedalus 122 (Spring 1993)Google Scholar; and Nathan, Andrew J., “Is Chinese Culture Dist inctive?” Journal of Asian Studies 52 (November 1993)Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ For example, Croll, Elisabeth J., Changing Identities of Chinese Women: Rhetoric, Experience, and Self-Perception in the Twentieth Century (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1995)Google Scholar; Gao, Xiaoxian, “China's Modernization and Changes in the Social Status of Rural Women,” trans. Campbell, S. Kather ine, in Gilmart, Christ ina K. et al. , in eds., Engendering China: Women, Culture, and the State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994)Google Scholar; and Wolf, Margery, Revolution Postponed: Women in Contemporary China (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ We asked more questions about gender attitudes in our 1993 survey, which will enable us to test this hypothesis.

⁴⁹ McCloskey and Brill (fn. 11), chap. 4; Prothro, James W. and Grigg, Charles M., “Fundamental Pr inciples of Democracy: Bases of Agreement and Disagreement,” Journal of Politics 22 (May 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁰ Nathan and Shi (fn. 46).

⁵¹ Factor analysis confirmed that the three sets of questions concern three different issue-areas, each of which emerged as a dist inct factor. Thus, scaling is an appropriate technique here. The democracy and social liberalism scales ran from 1 to 6, and procedural liberalism from 1 to 2.

⁵² McCloskey and Brill (fn. 11); and Page and Shapiro (fn. 13).

⁵³ We decided to exclude Tibet from this study for a number of reasons. Transportation there is difficult s ince there is no railroad and the highway system is not well developed. Many Tibetans do not speak Chinese. And it is difficult to f ind qualified interviewers to work there.

⁵⁴ Guowuyuan renkou pucha bangongshi (State Council, Population Census Office), Zhongguo 1990 nian renkoupucha 10% chouyang ziliao (Ten percent sample data of China's 1990 census), elecronic data edition, ed. Guojia tongjiju renkou tongjisi (Beijing: State Statistical Bureau Office of Population Statistics, 1990)Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ Ministry of Public Security of the PRC, ed., Quanguo fenxianshi renkou tongji ziliao, 1986 (Population statistics by city and county of the People's Republic of China, 1986) (Beijing: Ditu chubanshe, 1987).Google Scholar