{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016936671575846832, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0029455081001472753, 'mean_word_length': 6.041450777202073, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
RIGHTS CONSCIOUSNESS AND RULES CONSCIOUSNESS IN CONTEMPORARY CHINA

Do Chinese people have rights consciousness or only rules consciousness? Rules consciousness combines awareness of the necessity of having protection from rule-enforcement authorities with willingness to secure such protection through direct or indirect participation in rule-enforcement. Rights consciousness, on the other hand, combines awareness of the necessity of having protection from rule-making authorities with willingness to secure such protection through direct or indirect participation in rule-making. In contemporary China, rules consciousness presumes skepticism toward local rule-enforcement authorities and a sense of equality with them before central policies or state laws. By contrast, rights consciousness presumes skepticism toward central rule-making authorities and a sense of equality in relation to antecedent principles that are prior to and superior to political rules. A survey of farmers in 2007 shows that reactive claims against local rule-enforcement authorities are associated with skepticism toward township leaders, which suggests that they represent rules consciousness. Proactive claims against central rule-making authorities, on the other hand, are associated with skepticism toward central leaders, which suggests they reflect rights consciousness.