Political scientists Jie Chen and Bruce J. Dickson's new work Allies of the State: China's Private Entrepreneurs and Democratic Change is a major contribution to our understanding of the relationship between private entrepreneurs and democratic change in China. While there are a number of previous studies on the subject, none have presented this kind of detailed empirical analysis.

One of the authors' main arguments is that Chinese private entrepreneurs are not necessarily agents of change in the process of economic development leading to democracy. Early studies rooted in modernization theory argued that economic development tends to lead to political change. Another category of research focuses on the emergence of new social classes and how they act as agents of political change. Studies on Europe usually focus on the emergence of the bourgeoisie and the middle class and their inclination to act as such agents. However, as Chen and Dickson point out, democratization is seen by other scholars as a complex political process in which different parties negotiate their way forward. This means that a new social class such as private entrepreneurs does not necessarily promote or even support democratization. Instead, private entrepreneurs may be content with their existing strong relationships with the state. Building on these arguments and previous research on so-called late developers, countries in which states are often seen as having to play a more important role, Chen and Dickson present three basic propositions for which they then provide evidence: first, private entrepreneurs in China tend not to support political changes since that may threaten their privileged status; secondly, entrepreneurs tend to support the current regime and lack strong democratic values; and thirdly, this lack of democratic support tends to cause private entrepreneurs to engage in behaviour that supports the current state rather than promotes political reform, especially democratization.

Chen and Dickson's introductory chapter, which argues in favour of private entrepreneurs preferring a status quo, provides a good introduction into the analysis of capitalists and their potential role in democratization. The second chapter then proceeds with a brief discussion on the evolution of private entrepreneurship in China. However, what sets this book apart from previous research on the role of entrepreneurs in China's political reforms is the data that the authors use to analyze the behaviour and views of Chinese private entrepreneurs in the remaining chapters. Chen and Dickson have carried out a comprehensive survey in five coastal provinces: Shandong, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Fujian, and Guangdong. These provinces have more than 70 percent of the country's total number of private entrepreneurs. The survey, implemented during 2006–07, sheds light on Chinese private entrepreneurs and their relationship to the state and democracy.

It is generally understood that capitalists in China are becoming an increasingly important component of the country's political system. However, Chen and Dickson's analysis show that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has developed a strategy built on incorporating these capitalists into the regime. Focusing on the trustworthy and dependable, the party has developed a system that includes the most favoured capitalists and excludes the rest. The entrepreneurs that are included into the regime are also the most successful ones. This means that they have modest if any incentives to work as agents of change in China's current political system. While Chen and Dickson's data indicate that Chinese entrepreneurs support competitive elections of leaders, they do not support multiparty competition or the right to demonstrate in public. Again, entrepreneurs seem to support the existing system rather than change. Overall, the results indicate that private entrepreneurs prefer a very authoritarian and closed regime that can maintain stability and social order. At the same time, one of the main findings is that indicators of political embeddedness are not the driving force behind regime support. Instead, political beliefs are more important for continued regime support.

The most influential factors towards entrepreneurs' view of the current regime in China seem to be related to overall policy performance and their own material and social lives. The CCP knows this and focuses on improving general governance and the living standards of the Chinese people. Increasing levels of corruption in Chinese society thus poses a threat to the regime, as it may spark resentment and cause some capitalists to become agents of political change. Here, it is worth noting that the success of many private entrepreneurs is dependent on corruption from the start. Chen and Dickson thus argue that so-called red capitalists who are former cadres are the ones that are most likely to continue on as reliable supporters of the regime. So, while there is a chance for Chinese capitalists to transform into agents of change, this development is most likely heavily dependent on a significant decline in life satisfaction and continuing increases in corruption as well as an increase in their own support of democratic values.

Besides contributing to the research on politics in China, Chen and Dickson provide clear insights for economists that analyse how entrepreneurs are utilizing political connections to gain advantages in China where the CCP continues to play such an important role for economic development. Finally, the authors themselves bring up two important limitations to their study. First, the fact that the survey was carried out at one point in time only means that it is not possible to analyse changes over time. The fact that the data is cross-sectional rather than longitudinal in nature thus means that the analysis cannot capture trends over time, something that may prove to be crucial for a more definitive understanding of the role that private entrepreneurs may play in political change. Second, the study does not include a comparative analysis of private entrepreneurs and other groups in Chinese society. Naturally, both of these limitations are potential venues for future research.