The idea that the Chinese people, as a whole, are engaged in struggle, overcoming shame, or that every individual is responsible for the fate of the nation goes back before the Communist era. Since 1949, these ideas have been intensified, but it didn’t start there. And now’s a good time to remember it, because the 80th anniversary of the Jinan Incident is coming up next weekend. The Jinan Incident, on May 3rd 1928, was a brutal clash between Chinese and Japanese troops that both sides, it seems, wanted to avoid but failed. Kuomintang forces ended up retreating from the city, and the Kuomintang government declared May 3rd to be National Humiliation Day. A boycott of Japanese goods followed.
A new documentary on the 5-3 Massacre, “Do You Remember, Do You See?”, promises to “guide people through a recollection of history, not to forget national shame, strengthen their sentiments about historical mission and responsibilities, devote themselves to development, cherish peace, in the Chinese peoples struggle to rejuvenate the nation”. (引导人们缅怀历史，勿忘国耻，增强历史使命感与责任感，致力发展，珍爱和平，为中华民族的伟大复兴而奋斗) Many countries suffer humiliating battles in wars. Few nations seem to use losing battles in wars they eventually won to define their national identity, or to inculcate intense emotional feelings in their children about them. In 2005, one school, Cixi City Xufu Primary School in Zhejiang, had a banner that said “勿忘国耻，兴我中华” – “Never Forget National Shame, Let Our China Flourish”, while students signed a similar banner. The author says “This afternoon, all of our schools students and teachers held a “Never Forget National Shame, Let Our China Flourish” name signing ceremony in the courtyard to commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the victory in the War of Resistance Against the Japanese.” The writer goes on to describe the kids displaying feelings of “indignant nationalism” when they put pen to paper, so that they are “not merely trifling names, but in their hearts have a concentrated patriotic feeling.” Another article from 2007 talks about the “bloodsoaked history” of the Jinan Incident and begins with a photo of a young child being shown around the 5-3 Massacre Monument by an elderly relative, before launching into poetical language of how blood was like water and the rain like tears, how brutal those murderers were, how the past is a guide to the future, and again, to never forget this national humiliation.
This emphasis on national humiliation is quite something in China. It’s interesting to read this on ANZAC day; Gallipoli was an disaster, a pointless and bloody battle that claimed thousands of lives, and Australians are quite frankly nationalistic about it. The Sidney Morning Herald describes Gallipoli as the birthplace of “mateship”, “which gave legitimacy to Australia’s fledgling nationhood”, much as China struggled with nationhood in 1928. Yet the only use of the word “shame” I can find is that the ANZAC monument is a “derelict relic”. Though Gallipoli is considered a horrible mistake and loss, there is no invocation of indignant rage, or bitter grudges. Meanwhile, a Xinhua article on Chinese male celebrities greatest patriotic statements reports that Olympic hurdler and poster boy Liu Xiang “really hates Japanese” and so won’t ever wear or endorse their products “at any price”. There’s only 13 years between Gallipoli and Jinan.
The humiliation narrative connects to sports and the Olympics in a big way. Zhang Boling, one of several fathers of modern Chinese sports, described in this article as the Chinese Coubertin, or pioneer of the Chinese Olympics, said to get rid of the “Sick Man of Asia” label, “a great nation must first strengthen the race, a great race must first strengthen the body” (“强国必先强种，强种必先强身”) and “to strengthen the race, first strengthen the body” (“强我种族，体育为先”). This, as I’ve written before, falls in a tradition that goes back to China’s modern encounter with the West. This means that first of all, he considered the Western diagnosis of China as “sick” as the correct one, which is hardly a positive self-image. Second, he said that the need to cure the nation rested in the hands of every individual, an enormous burden to bear. And you can find references to national humiliation, the Sick Man of Asia and rejunvenating the nation in the official website of the Beijing 2008 Olympics. These are pre-CCP ideas, that continue alive and well.
It’s not just the sense of humiliation, either, that weighs heavy on Chinese shoulders. That’s strongly connected to rhetoric about Chinese people having lost and needing to reclaim their dignity, honor and strength, and its not simply the product of the government’s official history. Invoking the need to make China stronger, and that each individual has a responsibility to do so, is in everything, from Li Yang’s Crazy English “huckster nationalism” to doing push-ups.
Two phrases that are aren’t uncommon are 弱智的中国人 (feeble-minded Chinese) and 丑陋的中国人 (ugly Chinaman). The first made an appearance recently in a post on Time’s China Blog, where a Chinese journalist notes a conversation with a fellow Chinese about Tibet:
When I tentatively raised the topic with a long-time friend, who is well-educated and mild in manner, I was immediately cut short by a righteous lecture. “What do you have to complain about hostile phone calls?” he said. “Those shameless western mouthpieces deserved it! And It’s only for the best that CNN and BBC are blacked out so your lot could not pollute those weak-minded Chinese with your lies!”
The second comes from the book by Taiwanese author Bo Yang, The Ugly Chinaman and the Crisis of Chinese Culture. A reviewer on Amazon who has read the Chinese original explains:
His target audience was his fellow Chinese, especially those living in Taiwan, who at the time were still lulled in the belief that Chinese culture (or at least as it was preserved in Taiwan) was the best among all civilizations. While everyone acknowledged that the West was technologically superior, many felt that spiritually and culturally China still triumphed over the decadent West. No one disputed that Chinese society had severe problems. But prior to Bo Yang’s work, it was customary to blame these ills either on Westernization or a departure from China’s true values. Bo Yang turned the tables by arguing that the culture itself was the source of these ills. It is as earth-shattering as William Bennett coming out and identifying Judeo-Christian values as the source of much that is wrong with the West…
When Bo Yang’s work crossed the seas and entered the mainland, the effect was somewhat different. Mainland China had always blamed China’s evils on the “feudal” (whatever that term means) culture of ancient China, so in many ways Bo Yang’s criticism of Chinese culture resonated with what the communist government and mainland intellectuals believed at the time (this anti-tradition stance had reached its height in the 1919 May 4th Movement, and continued ever since on the mainland. In Taiwan, however, the ruling government returned to a staunchly pro-tradition, neo-conservative stance).
In an excerpt online, you can read:
Why must a Chinese person with the courage to speak even the thinnest slice of truth suffer this sort of fate? I’ve asked a number of people from the mainland why they ended up in prison. Their answer was, “I made a few true statements.” And that’s the way it is. But why does speaking the truth lead to such unfortunate consequences? My answer is that this is not a problem of any particular individual but rather of Chinese culture as a whole.
Just as Bo Yang is Taiwanese, there are other Chinese people around the world who talk as if there is something fundamentally wrong with China or Chinese people themselves. Doug Saunders received lots of congratulatory emails from overseas Chinese after he wrote an article some, though not Sauders himself, believed proved a conspiracy against China and interviewed one writer:
One typical e-mail came to me from a young man named Bin Wang, born to Chinese parents in a New England town, married to a white American woman, holding an advanced degree, well-travelled, fluent in English but not Chinese — that is, fairly typical of the pro-China movement. I know this because I actually phoned him to see if he was real and not a product of a back office in Beijing…
“Being Chinese,” he replied, “is not something easily forgotten when you move to a new land. Perhaps we don’t assimilate as well as others. But Chinese Americans are much more Chinese than Irish Americans are Irish. For them, it’s neat to discover their past. For us, it is very much a part of who we are. And the CCP is responsible for bringing pride back into being who we are. And that is why Western Chinese still consider themselves very much Chinese and would use the term ‘we’ to connect ourselves to China.”
But, I asked, isn’t this giving in to a paternalistic myth? His view of the Beijing’s regime as a kindly house builder portrays the Chinese as too weak to be trusted with the candy bowls and matchbooks of civil society without the helping hand of a strongman party.
To my surprise, he agreed with me, and turned this argument on its head, describing “paternalism” as exactly what the Chinese in his circle wanted and needed: Yes, he said, we need a paternal force ruling Beijing. For, without it, this ethnic nationalism will become more profound, more loud, more dangerous, and it will become a deadly menace.
There it is again; agreement with the idea that to be Chinese is to experience shame on behalf of your entire people and culture, a sense of weakness, that pride was lost and now needs to be returned. The second part I’ve highlighted is also quite critical of Chinese people, since it implies that Chinese people cannot control their own anger but instead need a strongman to do it.
Taiwan is proving to be an interesting example in all of this, as Bo Yang’s work was meant to counter excessive pride, and meanwhile the recent election of Ma Ying Jeou has been described as a blow to the stereotype that Chinese people “can’t handle real democracy”, a trope that does have some adherents.
There is a long-standing argument that the Chinese – who have lived through thousands of years of autarchy – are not fitted for and would find it impossible to create democracy. They cite places like Singapore, Hong Kong and Macau which don’t enjoy real democracy. However, Taiwan’s historic performance in these few days has contradicted such a theory, indicating that Chinese people are great – we have not only created a splendid civilisation in history and resurrected ourselves even after western exploitation, but also self-questioned and refreshed ourselves so as to step onto a main avenue of human civilisation. As Taiwanese have fulfilled all of this, then theoretically, mainlanders too will have no problem to be able to do so as well.”
These are just some of thousands of ideas that float around in the Chinese world of ideas. By no means is it monolithic. Rather, there are enormous debates again and again around these concepts. But the doubts, the anxieties, the pressure and the stress are real. And so when a foreign voice comes in, adding a new litany of complaints and pointing out flaws, it can sometimes be the straw that breaks the camels back. You can almost hear “I get enough of this s**t at home, don’t you start!” in the chants of protesters outside Carrefour. And as commenter Munir Ming points out, again at Time’s China Blog, pointing out China’s problems at this particular time is doubly bad, if not counterproductive. And to my Chinese friends, all I can say is, chill out. You’ve accomplished alot. Be proud of that, and cut yourselves some slack whether others give it to you or not.
No kidding. The Chinese carry too much baggage ( pride, humiliation, history etc.), probably more than anyone else does.
Baisu yields 1090 matches for 弱智的中国人. You don’t know how to use a search engine. The million you talk about is for pages that include “feeble minded” and “Chinese”, but not necessarily together.
Thanks for the informative and thought provoking article. I understand that Australians have something they call the “The Great Stain” or it just “The Stain”
of starting out as a penal colony that factored into Gallipoli. In the US African americans talk about having a “slave mentality” I underatand the Australian “stain” idea, but I find it hard to believe that it is all that intense today. I can understand why African Americans have issues still because the civil rights movement in the US was not that long ago and there are still people alive today who suffered Jim Crow for much of their lives.
I accept whole heartedly that Chinese today have this national humiliation shame feeling (complex), but it seems to me that the reason it is as strong as it is is because the government spends a lot of effort to keep it in the national conscience. The roots may predate 1949, but I think Chairman Mao understood the Chinese people much more than we ever will. He did not understand the west, but then he did not care to, because he was focused on his Chinese empire first. But Chiarman Mao understand how to use this national shame, understood how chinese use of chengyu (proverbs) and the way confucianism was a fundamental part of the culture, I think he was a master at promulagating his Mao Zedong thought through out chinese society in very subtle ways and that it is very pervasive still and his use of this national shame was one of his key levers for controlling, forcing, shaming etc chinese people for his own purposes.
Hu Jin Tao could explain it much better than I. believe Mao Zedong thought is no longer the guiding principle of the CCP, but I believe it still lingers in very subtle ways and this national shame complex is one of those ways.
This thread is getting away from me. I basically saying that this national shame is still being kept a live as a result of this, and it almost impossible for them to stop promulgating this because it effects them all.
To counter this the CCP would have to impliment a campaign to expunge this national sahme obeserve through a massize patriotic education program and a massive rewrite of the history books used today in china.
Most westerners I talk to about this all agree that Chinese people should not feel shame about the behavior of european and american imperialists. It was we who were the goons and thugs and the ones that should be ashamed.
“a great nation must first strengthen the race, a great race must first strengthen the body” (“强国必先强种，强种必先强身”) and “to strengthen the race, first strengthen the body” (“强我种族，体育为先”).”
Once people start talking like this it’s a very short step to some serious racial persecution—mass expulsions from China, ethnic cleansing. One doesn’t want to be too deluded about these things.
As Woody Allen joked in his movie “Anything Else”: “Never trust a naked bus driver. You’d be surprise how many people trust a naked bus driver, and worse! In the 1930s in Germany, there were groups called ‘Jews for Hitler’. They trusted a naked bus driver. Never trust a naked bus driver!”
Mutant Palm,
Just wanted to congratulate you again on an excellent blog. Your insights have been consistently excellent and accurate, and I for one will stay tuned. Just of curiousity (not a long-time reader), are you ethnic Chinese?
I express support, by the way, as one of the “pro-Chinese” drones who agrees with most (not all) of your analysis above. And yet my fierce, passionate feelings on these issues aren’t in any way diminished.
It’s interesting to see the other comments from (Western) folks who clearly interpret what you’ve written as a ringing condemnation of Chinese nationalism. (And I do get at least a hint of disapproval in what you’ve written.) But in my eyes, and I suspect in the eyes and minds of many Chinese, we see the facts that you’ve relayed as justification for what we support, and what we hope to achieve.
The fact that we interpret these facts so differently really shouldn’t be surprising. Let’s take a small snippet of East meets West shared cultural heritage: Bruce Lee and Jet Li. Innumerable Chinese and Americans have watched the collected works of both actors, I think.
I think Americans see their movies as non-threatening action movies, something on the order of Rocky or Jean Claude-Van Damme, but Asian. In contrast, many Chinese (from every corner of the planet) see in most of their movies the *same* nationalist themes you reiterate above: self-strength, self-reliance, and reversing the “humiliation” of past centuries. I wonder if Americans out there have reflected on that? Have reflected how often Jet Li and Bruce Lee were fighting against foreigners in defense of Chinese interests, Chinese sensitivities?
This overt nationalism in the movie sense became a little passe over the past decade, although Jet Li recently came out with a classic movie along the same tradition: huo yuanjia. Stories like Huo Yuanjia are the Chinese equivalent to the Christian Passion play, or the Jewish Passover. (For your next column, you can consider making the “humiliation” connection to the annual Jewish tradition of remembering their exodus from Egyptian slavery, thousands of years in the history books.)
Perhaps all of these traditions and philosophies are infantile, and perhaps we should all learn to start from scratch and return to our utopian garden, free of all original sin. But if that is the case, I think it’s asking an awful lot for a poor, impoverished developing nation to take the first step towards turning swords into plowshares. Let the developed world lead the way; be the change you wish to be, as they say. Tear down your borders first, get rid of your populist politicians that offer self-serving foreign policy.
I’m afraid on this issue China will inevitably be a follower, not a leader. As long as Western nations (at heart) place their own interests above the interests of the rest of the world… as long as Western nations prove willing to kill and impoverish others in order to preserve their own priviledges… we have to protect, treasure, and strengthen Chinese interests. (I realize this sentence seems harsh, but I want to make it clear I don’t intend this to be a critic of Western foreign policy; I only mean the above in the most value-neutral way possible.)
I believe we Chinese are on the same mission that many generations of great men/women have sacrificed themselves for, and until we achieve our goals of gaining for 1.3 billion people a fair share of the worlds’ economic and political fruits, I don’t think we can or should stop.
Good points, CCT, but I would say in regard to Bruce Lee and Jet Li, that maybe westerners notice the nationalism in their movies, but expect action movies to exploit the emotions of the audience? That’s how I see it, anyway.
It is possible that the West is also carrying some baggage in regards to Ethnic Nationalism. Any sort of discussion in the West on Ethnic Nationalism will inevitably head into Nazism. And when the West was confronted with Hitler and his concentration camps it at least began to realize (if not completely realize) the volatile nature of the ideology.
On the other hand, it doesn’t seem to resonate as strongly as in China. I’m not certain about Chinese education, but one sign I would point to about how big of a deal it is in the American education system is that my middle school English class covered the Holocaust as well. We were reading Elie Weisel’s “Night” and learning about the atrocities in 6th grade, before we were even learning about human sexual reproduction in 7th.”
Another strange thing was half our town is Asian, so in a sense, most of us weren’t really victims or perpetrators of the crime. But it still leaves an impression nonetheless.
Yeah, this description of historical burden carried by the Chinese people is pretty much spot on. I am curious though: is China unique? My perception is that Jewish people is somewhat similar in this regard. (This perception is open to debate since I profess much less understanding of their culture and history than the Chinese side.) If so, I don’t suppose the Jewish view would (as likely) be subject to a negative connotation when described. If further agreed so, why?
It is fortunate Jiang Jie Shi took many art and cultural relics with him when he fled. They certainly would have been destroyed.
I would guess the author to be either American or Aussie. or maybe canadian, briton, irish, scott, welsh or german in that order.
CCT
It is odd that you assume he must be chinese because of the sympathetic treatment of the national shame and humiliation.
You should try writing “morning pages” .
Every morning when you get out of bed first thing write 3 to 5 pages of whatever comes to your mind in any language. Just write continuously until you fill up at least 3 pages. Do this everyday for a month. Then go back over the pages and look for common themes.
African Americans often say “It’s a black thing you can’t understand”
I am human and I have compassion for other’s point of view so I can sometimes look at things from their point of view.
After reading your post several times it appears you are saying that whatever it is that is happening in your head right now “It’s a mainland Chinese Hanzu thing, you (especially westerners can’t possibly understand”
Would it help if I watch “Once Upon a Time in China” again?
I wonder if it is possible that Jin Jing might think “It’s a handicapped one-legged woman athlete thing and you cannot possibly understand”
What I admire about Jin Jing is that even though she is physically handicapped she is not mentally or emotionally handicapped. She is a credit to the human race and has qualities the rest of us should admire and emulate. I hope she is victorious in the Paralympics this year. I would thing even when her opponents lose to her in the fencing duels they still admire her.
Please try the morning pages and share what ever you feel comfortable sharing with us.
CCT,
You make an eloquent argument. One point of it, however, which has always bothered me, is this: that “China” and “the Chinese” should not be expected to change their mindset until they have achieved “development” or some sort of abstract sense of economic parity with the rest of the world.
I ask you: Where does that process of “development” actually end? When does victory come? It would suggest that this argument accepts the racist and social Darwinist ideas of economic/social development that have long been used to unfairly criticize those communities who have been subject to imperial or colonial domination. These ideas remain the engine of mainland Chinese social sciences, and well as of methods of control within the PRC. It is a simplistic sort of Marxism, and one that is very convenient for making all manner of excuses in regard to a social group.
Contrary to this outmoded idea — applied to the “Third World” — that economic “development” will, through some magical process, create a new thought regime to bring that nation into democratic, Western utopia, I would suggest that, no matter how down in the economic dumps one group may be or feel, that public expression of thought and the evolution of public and private political, social, and otherwise intellectual discourse is not a luxury of some late-capitalist wonderland, but an ongoing process in any society, one that should be recognized and encouraged. When economic times are hard, it is a bad idea to put intellectual change on hold or to pretend that thinking independently is financially unwise. Do you really want to wait until the government declares the achievement of communism to begin changing the way Chinese people view their world?
Mutant Palm – a most excellent blog. Great insight.
Del3 – unfortunately Jin Jing has already retired and won’t be taking part in this year’s Paraolympics. I do agree with you that she is a beautiful soul.
Edward – surprised and impressed by this quality blog and the well-thought comments by everyone. An Australian Chinese who grew up in Hong Kong.
@Alan: Right you are. It was late, I was juggling too many links. Took out the numbers.
@BOB: He said that nearly one hundred years ago. It was not followed, to my knowledge, by ethnic cleansing.
@Del3: The government definitely stokes the fires, particularly in the education system. But I think there’s a little bit of a chicken-egg problem here as whether the people believe it because of the government, or the government says it because the people believe it. It’s both.
@CCT: Am I Chinese? I look pretty white in that picture. Comparing Huo Yuanjia to the Biblical Exodus and Passover? This is precisely the sort of thing I’m cautioning against. First, one is a cheesy Hong Kong TV show from the 80s about a real nationalist martial artist from the turn of the century (one of the first external TV shows to hit the Mainland, I believe), the other is an ancient religious story shrouded in myth. Second, Passover doesn’t really have alot of blood-boiling aspects. If anything, Passover has an element of humility, remembering slavery, not resentment over humiliation. I don’t know of any Passover celebrations where people get all worked up and shout “Oooooh, I hate that Pharoah!” That’s not a big element. Praise, freedom, happiness seem more the order of that day. Not to mention Jet Li’s Fearless intensified the nationalist message by adding in a Japanese villain not seen in history.
@Jack, DJ: I think the West has plenty of ethnic nationalist baggage, and other cultures certainly have their sensitive spots. I’m having trouble, though, thinking of another culture or nation where people are so critical of themselves as a people, focus so intensely on humiliation, or pass angry resentment on to the next generation. Judaism seems to becoming a popular reference here. I’m not aware of contemporary Jewish culture telling children that its good to feel visceral anger at Germans for humiliating their people, or Jewish communities around the world saying Jews want their pride back. If they think anybody ought to be ashamed, its the Germans. I would say this is the obvious conclusion, but China appears to have proven me wrong.
OpkeHessip,
I don’t subscribe to the communist belief but do agree with a few basic concepts in the Marxism theory. The key one is that the productivity level of a society dictates the political superstructure.
Translation: I do not believe that democracy is effective/meaningful until the society consists of a significant component of middle class who, for a lack of better phrase, know and demand better for themselves.
That much of today’s western world could be argued to have transited that threshold with something already somewhat resembles democracy beforehand is entirely due to enslaving and robbery of the rest of the world.
China, by the way, still has much to go with today’s demography and economy. It is not a fast road but a necessary one for a peaceful emergence. It pains me to see so many things I know are wrong and know also how long they would take to improve and correct. Yet I also believe that there isn’t much alternatives. I am thankful that China is not Russia or India.
China is on the right track. And I will not tolerate it derailed by those people of which some are well meaning but misguided but many are just hellbent to deny China a chance.
We have a long historical perspective, we also have a long view towards the future.
Dave,
Re: “I’m not aware of contemporary Jewish culture telling children that its good to feel visceral anger at Germans for humiliating their people, or Jewish communities around the world saying Jews want their pride back. If they think anybody ought to be ashamed, its the Germans. I would say this is the obvious conclusion, but China appears to have proven me wrong.”
That’s because the Jewish people finally made it. The relentless self reminder of the humiliation suffered by the Chinese people can be simply explained as self awareness that China still has some way to go.
Re: “there’s a little bit of a chicken-egg problem here as whether the people believe it because of the government, or the government says it because the people believe it.”
The decisive rejection of the past (culture and politics) by the Chinese people started well before the communists took hold of the power because there was a collective awareness/conviction that it was the old way that made China weak and brought about all the humiliations. So yeah, I think it is a case of government saying something because people believe it.
CCT,
Didn’t you notice the name “DAVE” on the jacket in the picture? hehe
@DJ
“Yet I also believe that there isn’t much alternatives. I am thankful that China is not Russia or India.”
Hmm, I would say the same would be felt by Russians and Indians toward China. Another quirk due to nationalism.
The average chinese person was not affected by the opium war or european imperialism. The civil wars and the warloads affected a lot more people. The invasion by japan was more severe, the civil war between the nationalist and the communists affect even more average chinese. The cultural revolution affected more chinese than the opium wars. Sorry the only reason it is more fresh in the minds of all these friggin 20 year old whinning little emperors and empresses today more than the cultural revolution and tiananmen and the great leap backwards is because that is what they are taught.
How many taiwanese participated in the protests? how many taiwanese are whinning about imaginary links between french grocery stores and the dalai lama.
Hong Kong seems strangely quiet. Sorry this universal chinese shame fest is pretty much limited to the 20 years old netizen demographic. Let’s go interview the 1.1B non netizens to see if they are even aware of carrefore.
The great danger of the “national humiliation” thesis is that past experiences will affect current and future behavior. Yes, there is a strong case to be made for the argument that the west does not want China to be strong and treated as an equal. But it is another for Chinese to wear their chip on their shoulder.
I, for one, would be really impressed if a Chinese company devoted its energy to making outstanding products which everybody would want to buy and own, as is the case with Apple. Now, if China could come up with a company and products like that, made by Chinese for the whole world, I would really be impressed.
As for the Jinan incident, that is something which happened in the past.
Jack,
Or due to indoctrinations? Except I don’t live in China, Russia and India, not for the last 20 years.
Let me elaborate a bit: Russia had a very sorry period of time after taking up radical political reform without progressive changes in the economy first, and got benefits in neither as a consequence. The recent up turn in Russia is in no small part due to its luck in selling resources (oil) at a good price. However, I strongly believe that prosperity based on selling one’s raw resource has no long term future whatsoever. Just look at the middle east.
India. Well there are too many things to talk about. Fundamentally , I doubt the significant fraction, and ever increasing number due to high birth rate, of population living in abject poverty and illiterate truly enjoy their advantage of abstract human rights because they can vote are better off than the Chinese. I talk as someone who still have clear memory of what it means to live in adjective poverty. Well, just about all people of my age who grow up in China know what it means, and how much a difference 30 years make.
Jack,
Have you read the article written in LA Times back in 1999 comparing China and India when it was about 50 years for both country since their respective independences? Sorry I don’t remember much about the title anymore. The article discussed extensively why China was comprehensively better off than India using just about every objective metrics even though India was enjoying supposedly a better system and support from the rest of the world. It was a very interesting read for me and I think the points made in the article are still illuminating today.
There’s nothing “Chinese” about this obsession with victimhood and humiliation. It’s just a mainland thing, encouraged by the Party to give everyone something to focus on and stew over. China wasn’t the only country to suffer foreign occupation in the 19th century, but you don’t see Vietnamese or Indonesians wringing their hands about the national humiliation at the hands of the French or Dutch, even though they suffered much more under colonial rule.
The obsession with national pride/shame co-exists with a lack of civic pride/shame. Chinese love saying how much they love China, but their distrust of other Chinese verges on paranoia, and they show their love of their motherland by treating it as a garbage dump.
@Del3
There aren’t any Carrefores in Hong Kong. :p
Kidding.
Well, HKers are too pragmatic to boycott anything, afaik. And they don’t really care that much about Tibet or history. As to national shame, most of the younger generations are still too proud of HK’s history as a British colony to care about the Eight Nation Alliance. Most of us just see mainland China as another coloniser, so there will never be a lot of agreement with the Angry Youths. The only people who still spout words about national pride and shame, etc. are the mainland Chinese officials and the older generation who still think of themselves as Chinese-Chinese.
I mean, mentally and emotionally, Hong Kong might as well be independent.
Apologies to everybody whose comments got held up in moderation. I’m only here some of the time, but spam is forever.
@DJ: I agree that China is doing a lot of things right. But to sort of echo OpkeHessip, there’s always going to be more progress to make. There’s no “end of History” in all this. The point is not that China should stop progressing, but is it necessary to approach it from such an aggrieved position? Why can’t it be done with less reliance on resentment or self-blame?
As for Jewish people, I’m not aware of Jewish culture having a strong undercurrent of self-admonishment before they “made it” either. Anne Frank didn’t hide in the attic writing about how ashamed she was of herself or her people. There are plenty of countries around the world that have significant problems with poverty, development and the like that don’t motivate themselves through shame.
As I say in the post, I agree that this started before the CCP. My hesitation is simply due to the unprovable possibility that if the government ceased this approach, the people might consider other alternatives more quickly than if the CCP waits for people to demand they change their perspective. It’s counterfactual and there’s no way to know, but it tempers my view that the Party is solely responding to public opinion.
@Paul Denlinger: I would be happier if China spent less time caring whether or not you are impressed with them, and more time caring on being securely confident in themselves. In a quiet way that doesn’t involve being hypercritical of themselves.
@Mick: if it’s exclusively a Mainland thing, why are first generation ABCs and famous Taiwanese authors echoing similar thoughts?
I should mention the graphic novel American Born Chinese, which also tackles related issues.
We shall forgive, but never forget..
A new superpower, but with its people still remember who did what since 1840 in their country, I don’t think this picture is pretty for western people and instead, kind of chilling.
It is easy to blame the government, but recently pro-Tibet movement in the West did a way way better job to remind the Chinese what the west really is – hyprocritical, selfish and undercurrent racism, I believe the Chinese government is laughing their ass off for that.
The communication between Chinese and the west did not bring more understanding, so far, the gap is even bigger than ever before. Maybe some day we can finish this chapter of human history together, and we can get even after so many years. After all, the current western wealth and life style is built on top of hundreds years of injustice and genocide of other nations, its root is dirty and full of blood, every time I look at Iraq, it reminds me of China 150 years ago, but it is still HAPPENING!!
What is wrong with the West?
Well, basically the author has made some efforts to understand China, and I appreciate that. However, he is just collecting some small pieces of information from different places and try to put them together to make a big picture. I have to say this “big picture” is still quite far from the truth, although it’s correct on certain aspects.
To make it more comprehensive, it’s like when you meet one more Chinese and listen to what he/she say, you will change your view a little bit (as there are so many random remarks from random people cited as supporting evidences here). The people you meet really determine your view, and some of them look somewhat “strange” to me (or I don’t think their views are representative). It’s also possible that you misunderstood part of their remarks a little bit.
Anyway, I’m impressed by your efforts. At least I believe you understand the Chinese more than I understand the westerners, so I’m not really in any position to criticize.
OpkeHessip,
“When economic times are hard, it is a bad idea to put intellectual change on hold or to pretend that thinking independently is financially unwise. Do you really want to wait until the government declares the achievement of communism to begin changing the way Chinese people view their world?”
What do you mean by this? Who do you expect to “change the way Chinese people view their world”? Only the people can change themselves! And what makes you think that Chinese people are not thinking independently?
Del3,
It’s not that we are different people so that you can’t understand me. It’s that the thing is so complex it’s really impossible to talk about it over an internet thread like this. So saying “you are not a Chinese, you don’t understand” is an easy way to give you a basic idea in such circumstances. If we have oppotunities to meet face to face I’m confident to have you understand what I’m saying in an hour 🙂
@XniteMan: “However, he is just collecting some small pieces of information from different places and try to put them together to make a big picture. I have to say this “big picture” is still quite far from the truth, although it’s correct on certain aspects.”
Have you read Wang Jianshuo’s Six Blind Men and China?
http://tinyurl.com/4uwo3j
Thanks for the complement though.
As for OpkeHessip’s comment, I can’t say for certain but when he’s talking about “thinking independently” I think he’s talking about the governments reinforcement of the idea that China cannot let go of its shame until it has “made it”. Hopefully he’ll drop by and clarify.
I have to say this is one of the much better blog postings I’ve read since I started paying attention to China-themed blogs after the Tibet Riot.
CCT,
as usual, I share many of your sentiments
DJ,
“That much of today’s western world could be argued to have transited that threshold with something already somewhat resembles democracy beforehand is entirely due to enslaving and robbery of the rest of the world.”
Couldn’t have said it any better myself, and it sickens me to see how these Western hypocrites think that their development and wealth was all due to their high mental capacity and brilliance.
Mick,
“The obsession with national pride/shame co-exists with a lack of civic pride/shame. Chinese love saying how much they love China, but their distrust of other Chinese verges on paranoia, and they show their love of their motherland by treating it as a garbage dump.”
I absolutely agree with you, and it really breaks my heart to realize this, as I live and work in China right now. Unfortunately it’s the culture and the nature of the Chinese people, and through progress and time I think China and Chinese peeople will eventually be better than what it is now. China and its people have much bigger fishes to fry and priorities to deal with.
Mao,
I totally agree with you as well, for those of us who’ve lived in the US for a long time, we’ve had the opp. to better understand both cultures, and I’m glad that more Chinese people are becoming more aware of how the West operates.
Again, I’ve said it before, it makes me real proud to see how Chinese people have reacted and come together since the Tibet riot, and it brings me great pleasure to see how some Westerners are beginning to shit in their pants. Our nationalism is real and it’ll be the decisive factor to end Western power hedgemony over Mother Earth. As they say, payback is a bitch. Frankly, it’s about time.
First you get the money, then you get the power, then you get the women.
This is true for both Miami gangsters as it is for Nation States. Economic development and the accumulation of surplus and capital leads to the surplus being spent on the acquisition of power and influence which then neatly dovetails into respect and adulation. Everybody loves a champ, nobody likes the chump.
The Western view of nationalism has been so colored by the experiences of the two world wars that they miss how instrumental it is in the formation of social contracts. Mick points out how the Chinese seem so fond to screw one another over for a quick buck (broadly speaking for 1.3 billion individuals), this is because Chinese aren’t nationalist enough. Benedict Anderson pointed out how critical it is to forming communities. The problem with Chinese nationalism is that it is broad in breadth but shallow in depth. Shame itself is a critical element of nationalism, the Chinese shame at past humiliations provides impetus to improve their situation and provides a common ideological locus to form a community. Without this nationalism and shame, China would be like the dysfunctional states of Africa.
To answer Opke’s question of where development ends, the answer is fairly simple. It ends when the Chinese people and the state demonstrates their power in a conclusive and final manner. Take for example the 1999 U.S. bombing of the Chinese embassy in Serbia. The U.S. response was an essentially a “whoops my bad, but you probably had it coming somehow” apology and the Chinese could do nothing in response but seethe and impotently protest. When the hijackers attacked the world trade center. The U.S. responded by bombing the hell out of Afghanistan and then invading it. Less than two years later because Afghanistan was apparently not enough, it bombed the hell out of Iraq and then invaded it. War, whether you win or lose, is powerfully cathartic. China during the 1950’s was far weaker than it is today but it’s people were much more confident. Why this was so is because they had just fought the greatest power in the free world to a bloody standstill in Korea and succored the triumphalism that Marxism-Leninism was on the march across the world and China stood at the vanguard. With the jettisoning of Socialism in China, it also ended up jettisoning all it’s accomplishments. The Chinese people basically had the rug pulled out from under them and have to rebuild a new sense of Chinese nationalism on the embers of the pre-communist past.
I guess basically what I’m saying is that eventually China will need to open up a huge can of whoop ass on somebody to expunge the burdens of history and chart a new intellectual course.
Jing,
May I humbly suggest Japan as the lucky recipient of this Sino-whoopass? My choices are:
1. Japan – Self-explanatory
2. UK – self-explanatory
3. South Korea – their women are so fine, and they talk too much trash.
@Jing & @Middle Finger Kingdom: Gentlemen (I presume), there are plenty of places you can plot China’s future copying of that other American product, war. Not here. Take it outside.
I wasn’t plotting anything, just pointing out the obvious. Conflict and struggle is part of the human condition and that any discussion of changes in political atmospheres without touching on the deep transformative effects of war on societies seems to be simply missing the point.
@Jing: That’s fine, I just wanted to prevent you from going off on a tangent with Middle Finger about who to bomb.
As for your point, demonstrating power can be done in different ways, as can dealing with shame. If the only way to deal with shame was to beat the crap out of someone, then human beings would always be stuck in a circle of violence. Clearly that’s not the case. People often find other ways to deal with their issues that don’t involve attacking others. But if you frame things in terms of humiliation, you have to seek revenge.
Shame is not a critical element of nationalism for many other countries as it is for China. While ANZAC day is about remembering a tragedy, they don’t carry shame for it today. They honor their soldiers by remembering their bravery, not the humiliation of their country. They don’t frame their nationalism in terms of something lost, but something gained, even in defeat. Your example of Iraq is a flawed one – it’s now polling as the most unpopular war the U.S. has ever fought. It’s not been cathartic, Americans now feel less confident about their country and leaders than anytime in recent times, if not its entire national history. Or how about a country like Brazil? Once a true colony, unlike China’s partial colonialism, I don’t see it conducting any “cathartic” wars. Yet it has had great successes in recent years and doesn’t appear to be motivated by humiliation, or cry out in anguish that it has not had satisfaction.
As saying China would be like dysfunctional countries in Africa if not for its shame… well, I see several problems. One, you are again saying that shame is the only route to national pride. I disagree. Two, I’m skeptical that the problems in Africa are due to a lack of shame, or nationalism, and would appreciate some concrete examples. Three, this is counterfactual. How could you possibly know what China would be like if reality were not as it is?
Dave,
I think the root cause for such self-enforced national reminder of shame and indignation in China goes back far beyond the events in the last 150 years. Take for example the stories of 岳飞, that have been widely popular historically and particularly so since the early Qing dynasty. I would argue 岳飞’s life stories, which is fundamentally more of a tragic story of a nation, resonated in han-Chinese for so long in a way that is not unlike the more modern phenomenon you described in this writing.
Background: 岳飞 is a “[han]-Chinese patriot and military general who fought for the Southern Song Dynasty against the Jurchen armies of the Jin Dynasty. Since his political execution, Yue Fei has evolved into the standard model of loyalty in Chinese culture.” (source: wikipedia)
Essentially, the Chinese people have repeatedly experienced the all too familiar cycles of being invaded and conquered by outsiders; absorbing the conquerers into the fold of Chinese through assimilation; and being invaded and conquered again by another outside group. That those invaders brought with them land constituting significant portion of today’s China is more of a side effect. The memories of these rounds of sufferings stung and accumulated. Eventually, the people collectively realized that Chinese, being innately peaceful and non-aggressive, needs to constantly remind selves the past suffering. The fear is that if we do not do so, we would inevitably start to be complacent, leading to weakness, and then become target of another round of humiliation again. There is one famous saying that resonates so very much in the Chinese people: lacking behind (i.e. weakness) invites being beaten.
While I don’t disagree that CCP benefits from this, I don’t think the Party is the cause.
Oops, there was a typo above. I meant to say: “LAGGING behind (i.e. weakness) invites being beaten.”
Shame is a critical element of every form of nationalism. Shame is caused by the sense of disappointment that the country is not headed in what you view as the right direction. The proper direction is dependent on the circumstances of the situation. For the West in general following ww2, nationalism has been shaped by the prosperity and security of the Cold War era and a community formed by the common threat of the Soviet Union. Thus shame in Western nationalism at least superficially has been about meeting certain enlightenment ideals and their countries inability to live up to them. This I believe is only a temporary phenomenon made possible by unparalleled affluence and that the reptilian brain and “atavistic” notions of us-vs-them are much stronger than most give credit for and are always under the surface of even the most enlightened.
Nationalism in China has not sprung up from such a nurturing environment and the shame that Chinese feel is more immediate because it is not simply due to the Chinese state’s inability to meet idealistic expectations, but rather it’s inability to meet materialistic expectations of providing security and prosperity. The failure of the state to meet the earlier steps on the hierarchy of needs left little room for
Your example of ANZAC day is not particularly relevant. For one thing ANZAC day is remembering a battle where the Australians and New Zealanders were belligerents that invaded someone else halfway around the world on behalf of the British empire which they were subject/citizens of.
Likewise American confidence in the execution of the Iraq war is also for different reasons. A segment of the country feels shame because they feel that the Iraq invasion has been a violation of certain principals which they feel American represents. Another segment are simply frustrated that after 5 years, victory is still elusive and the present government is simply incompetent. Another segment still is motivated by the fear of failure and humiliation and is determined at all cost to support the prosecution of the war no matter what.
As a former student of Brazilian history, I can say the comparison with China is somewhat ridiculous. The Luso-Brazilian elite were not colonized, they were the colonizers in the first place!
Those states in Africa that are dysfunctional are precisely in the mess they are is because they are not nationalist enough. More immediate community loyalties; to the family, to the tribe, to the religious community, over-ride any sense of national commitment. Part of this is social as their families are too large (nuclear families are fundamental in strengthening the state; extended families weaken them) and the other part is that the borders drawn by the European withdraw do not match well with pre-existing affiliations. Just look at Kenya for one.
Wow, this thread certainly opened a can of something.
My position is that excess nationalism arising from historic grudges isn’t good. It may be ‘cathartic’, but considering the number of developing world countries with a history of being screwed over, the 21st century looks very ugly if each seeks to right a wrong.
The fact is you never end up righting the same wrong, and possibly end up wronging someone else. Israel certainly has never done anything to ‘get back’ at Germany, but the insecurity and uncompromising philosophy arising as a response to the holocaust has ended up shaping Israel’s relationship with its neighbours for decades.
Chinese thinkers may think they’ve got it pegged by looking at Japan, Europe and the US as ‘karmic enemies’, but who says this nationalism won’t end up stoking tension with another rising power, like India?
However, I do agree that some form of greater collectivism is vital in building up a nation or a geopolitical pole. Certainly, Africa only had few chances at Pan-Africanism, but all the build up was squandered as forces often with outside support (e.g. communists and anti-communists, religious groups) exploited differences.
China seems to be in a unique position barring the odd separatist group. However I think this nationalism can be used constructively and not ‘unleashed’ upon someone else. Such a philosophy of cathartic violence sounds too much like Fanon – which is great for national liberation movements by a poor guide for a nation moving to developed status.
Incidentally, I do think the original question of this thread – whether Chinese ‘shame’ is unique – is not addressed by calls for vengeance. Calls for vengeance come from any wronged people, whether they feel they have a shame to clean off or not.
To reply mildly, as I am tired:
As to proving China’s greatness and confidence: one thing the PRC is awfully good at is avoiding military conflict. Honestly, I think that’s a good thing, and I hope that there’s a way to build national confidence and pride through another sort of transformative event. I’m not sure that slow economic change, however, is going to do that in the sort of way that is necessary to overcome the psychology of shame.
As to my comment on “thinking freely”, mostly in reply to XniteMan: forgive my imprecise suggestion. Yes, what I meant was that the people of the PRC should not wait until some sort of economic utopia is achieved to change their idea of themselves, to get away from the current historical perspective that imputes an inherent shame to particular historical events of especial saliency. Now, the way Chinese people understand history, as with just about anyone anywhere else in the world, has a great deal to do with education, which privileges the voices of certain approved experts, whose ideas are passed on to impressionable young people. Yes, only people, in a sense, can change their own minds, but the way in which their minds change is dependent on the informational available and the way in which that information is packaged and presented. In the PRC, this is a matter of government policy. Changes in education can have a profound effect on individual and group psychology: my German friends, for example, have deep-seated complexes about Nazism and the idea of “race” that have come about, in part, from new emphases on the Nazi era in their history classes. The same may someday be true of Japanese schoolchildren. I, for one, have never forgiven Andrew Jackson for the Trail of Tears and curse every time I see a $20 bill…
davesgonechina,
From my googling, the battle at Gallipoli was a failed invasion, I don’t see how it’s comparable to the Jinan incident. As to Brazil, more than half of its population are white, and the other half are mostly offsprings of white people. Of course they don’t feel humiliated, they are the ones who humiliated others.
I do agree that war is not a good way to demonstrate power though, and I don’t see any trend that China is going to war yet. If you look at the map, you will know there really aren’t many targets to wage a war against around China, and we are always a country content of the middle land east of the Himalayas, west of the eastean sea, north of the South Asian jungles and south of the no man’s land in Siberia, throughout our 4000-year history.
OpkeHessip,
There are indeed artificial efforts to instill the sense of shame in students minds, like what happened in the Cixi City Xufu Primary School in Zhejiang described in this blog. However, these are far from the dominant cause. 90% of all students never parcitipated in anything like this anyway.
The ultimate cause of the sense of shame, IMHO, is not any government policy, but the history itself. Do we have to learn history at all? If we learn about our ancient history, we know that we have been the most advanced and powerful country in the world for thousands of years; if we look at our recent history, we know that we were defeated and colonized. How would your independent thinking lead you to a different conclusion than shame? The point is not only the recent defeats, but its comparison with our ancient glory. China is so unique in such a sentiment because it’s the only ancient civilization in the world that has lasted to today.
Imagine America maintains its current position for 2000 years and suddenly it’s defeated and colonized by other countries for a century, killing millions, when it gains its independence later, I’m sure its people will fell the same sort of shame we feel now. And if you look at Russia, it had only been a superpower for 50 years and lost this glory for a decade (far from being defeated yet), you can see such feeling of “shame” among its people already.
davesgonechina,
I was thinking you guyes would get the humor in my bellicose posting, seriously, Korean women are very fine, they have great smooth skin….:)
Anyway, all of you guys have covered most of the tenets of current China. I just wanted to add that, a constructive nationalism is absolutely essential in uniting the Chinese people as well in keeping China adhered to and focused on its goal the CCP and the Chinese people set for themselves. Chinese Nationalism is our brand of Nationalism, and Western concerns and worries about it is the result of looking at it from their own historical perspective and collective history. Westners have this deep-seated desire to frame everything in the world according to their frames of reference and ideological thinkings. Guess when you’ve been on top of the world for so long, you never need to care how others think. And China’s rise is perhaps the first time there’s a non-western power that’s directly challenging their supremecy.
In the future, I don’t think China will invade other nations, but I think it will fight proxy wars via non-militaristic means with other powers competing for geopolitical and geo-strategics advantages.
Despite my hatred of Japan for historical reasons, I’m willing to let it go, and I believe if Japan can get it’s head out of its ass and come back to the Asian fold, then the world is ours. This might take another generation or two to get those Japs back to being our bitch again. Only history will tell.
hi dave, your post has me thinking about the way moral values are transmitted. i don’t think it’s enough to inculcate shame in order to influence people’s actions; negative exhortations are rarely as successful as we like to think. instead, i think that negative exhortations have to include an implicit positive value–the reason for the shame, so to speak.
i think that the idea that the nanjing massacre is somehow china’s national shame and not japan confirms the idea that “might makes right” and the attendant “blame the victim” mentality. in this formulation, the reason for the massacre was not only china’s weakness, but also japan’s relative strength. and national strength, no matter how used or to what end, is what is being held up as the ultimate social good.
in this sense, i think it’s telling that much of what is at stake in older and neo variants of confucianism is the proper use of power within unequal relationships. the moral question becomes, when and under what conditions should a person, a family, a community, and a country jettison the proper use of power in order to establish or maintain a particular set of unequal relationships? and if you don’t do the necessary to transform oneself into the stronger person, family, community, and/or country, to what extent is your humiliation your own fault and thus your shame?
@Xniteman
“The point is not only the recent defeats, but its comparison with our ancient glory. China is so unique in such a sentiment because it’s the only ancient civilization in the world that has lasted to today.”
Im not sure if this is really accurate on a few levels. How about Jewish culture, Indian civilization?
The idea of ‘ancient glory’ itself is taught from the Han histories. Wasn’t this slightly subjective and self- serving? The old dynasties we are told were glorious, but how do we really know…the emperor’s historians said so is probably one way.
But modern shame because of a loss of that putative glory? Id say it is also based in envy that China didn’t develop and the West did then brought its developed might down on China like it did elsewhere in Asia, not just China.
Japan was able to develop because it had a better idea of itself as a coherent nation – something the Chinese people due to China’s enormity, regionalism, internal divisions and rule by foreign (Manchu) power did not have in the 19th. c.
Another reason,apart from western intrusion for its shame, is that of its failed opportunity to become great – it failed to read the signs of the times. Perhaps as China is doing right now. Basking in its ancient glory at the time could not empower it to truly face the challenge of modernity: a la Western historiography on China’s response to the West. in the 19th c. Solely blaming the west for this shame is really a cop out it needs to address. Its an imbedded feeling of inferiority that national and cultural pride has never forgiven. Its dangerous and a hot bed for fascist growth: the shamed and wounded nation syndrome. Any precedents from history there?
I agree with the earlier comment that the “Jews made it”. Regardless of follow-on incidences of anti-Semitic oppression that has its way of popping up in Europe every century or two, I think we can all agree that the Jews have escaped the Pharaoh’s clutches. The fact that Passover is *still* remembered must be seen in that light.
In contrast, not to be overly melodramatic here, but China in the eyes of many Chinese still suffering under the lash of the Pharaoh’s whip. We had a certain claim to the worlds’ wealth and power 200 years ago, and we simply don’t have that today. This is why the repeated reference to the Chinese people “standing up” in all of our most powerful nationalistic messages; we’re not sitting in penthouse condos nursing a grudge over caviar and shark’s fin, we see ourselves as still being in the process of climbing to our feet, and reasserting our fair say over the world.
OpkeHessip asked a very interesting question. “When” is enough? I’d extend that question further. Is there a point where Chinese “humiliation” should be considered erased? Will my descendents carry this chip on their shoulder indefinitely?
If we believe those who argue for the “universal” value of democracy, then perhaps the answer is: Chinese nationalism will have run its course when the Chinese have finally achieved that value on the global scale. There are 1.3 billion of us in China; this is greater than the population of Europe and the United States, combined. In a “fair” and democratic world, our voices would at least carry corresponding weight, and policies would be designed to forward our causes.
In an ideal world where the United Nations and the World Bank saw all men as being created equal, China’s opinions, values, desires would thus be more meaningful than those of Europe and the United States, combined. In such a democratic world, China would perhaps be able to dictate:
– a rewriting of the worlds’ trade laws, such that we have an equal say towards the worlds’ wealth; rework the developed world’s intellectual property laws, for example; eliminate agricultural subsidies and trade tariffs in the West, for another example…
– a new perspective towards global wealth redistribution. Many democratic nations have marginal tax rates, with wealthier citizens taxed more heavily to provide basic services towards the poor. In a democratic world, does it really make sense for wealth and resources to be accumulated in the hands of nations that represent less than 15% of the worlds’ population?
– a new perspective towards environmental protection. Nations should be expected to invest in preserving our shared world, on the basis of per-capita greenhouse gas production (including historical production).
For 200 years, a small minority of the world has claimed a greater share of the worlds’ wealth and the worlds’ political power. I don’t blame Western citizens for not volunteering to participate in a redistribution scheme, and I recognize that they’re only inheriting the wealth that their forefathers have accumulated for them. I understand that it’s only history; no one still alive in the US or Europe blew up Chinese forts in the name of the opium trade, and no one participated in the African slave trade.
But fundamentally, many of us don’t believe that this distribution is fair. Speaking on a personal basis, “development” for China will be complete when this distribution becomes fair, when people are no longer penalized in economic achievement by the unlucky act of being born in China, when average Chinese receive proper compensation for their sacrifice and hard work.
I don’t agree for a second at those who claim Chinese nationalism is aimed “solely” at the West. We ourselves will always be the first targets of this nationalism. I say with great certainty that the instant the current Chinese government proves itself unable to continue the process of re-constructing our country, it will be discarded. The Communist Party doesn’t have enough tools of oppression to frighten the Chinese public into accepting an international status that doesn’t match our nationalistic aspirations.
@ CCT
Wouldnt China then be better off spending much of its expanding GDP on the average poor farmer and unemployed than on its military build up and real estate ventures around the world? Spread the wealth around at home so to speak.
@Jing: I’ll concede for the moment, though I’m by no means convinced, that shame is a necessary part of nationalism. But at the same time, I’ll put the question to you: why is the shame for the Jinan Incident to be carried by Chinese? Why should they feel shame for ancestors who fought to protect their homeland simply because they lost?
I still believe the ANZAC example is relevant. Australia was, by its own narrative, establishing its identity as an independent nation, apart from the British Empire, and trying to throw off the notion that they were a nation of criminals. Yet there seems to be little evidence of the Australians using a lost battle that should not have happened as an example of national humiliation. Rather they frame it as a national triumph. Like Jinan and the War against Japanese Aggression, the losing side at Gallipoli emerged the winner of the war, and Australia, like China, moved forward in establishing its national sovereignty and identity in the process. So why does China emphasize personal resentment, anger and bitterness in its loss while Australia emphasizes its heroism?
Australia takes their “criminal background” and turns it into a strength with myths like Ned Kelly. Why can’t China do the same without consistent denigrating itself? I don’t think whether they “made it” has anything to do with it. A struggling nation can still look back to a past event and see heroism rather than humiliation. In fact, I’d argue its necessary step TO “make it”. Now Australia is consciously attempting to change the “national memory” of Gallipoli, feeling perhaps they have gone too far in the other direction. These things are not immutable natural laws, they are human perspectives that change with time and circumstance.
As for Brazil, you seem to have misunderstood my point, which is that Brazil is another country that is struggling to “make it”, yet I see no sign of contemporary Brazil believing it will only have truly done so until they “open a can of whoop-ass”. I was responding simply to the argument that nations need to demonstrate their military power conclusively to feel they’ve reached the apex of their struggle. Brazil is a nation that does not appear to feel that way. Nor do I believe they have to.
@Xniteman: I’m not comparing Gallipoli to Jinan. I’m comparing how Australians positively remember Gallipoli to how Chinese negatively remember Jinan. As for 90% of students never participating in National Humiliation celebrations, I’m not so sure. But I am sure that the narrative of humiliation, and the duty of everyone to feel personal resentment and anger about it, is a fundamental part of 100% of students history curriculums.
@MFK: If you expect to make the Japanese “your bitch again”, as you so unfortunately put it, then if you subscribe to the idea that all nationalism requires reasserting power, they’re gonna try and get revenge. You really want an endless cycle of hate? That’s a sad way to see the world.
@Mary Ann: You’re expressing some things alot better than I can. These threads drain me after a while. I guess I’m trying to advocate something like this: there’s nothing wrong with drawing the lesson from Nanjing that China must become stronger. It’s the idea that China should denigrate itself for being weak that I find unnecessary, or at the very least not sufficiently counterbalanced by “positive values”.
@CCT: At least you and I agree that Chinese nationalism is directed at China itself more than outside. My point, again: why does it have to involving so much self-criticism? Why can’t it emphasize the positive without so much self-denigration? Why must it always be coupled with bitter resentment?
I’m taking a break from this thread to move on to other topics, as I start to get bogged down by the sheer size of the thing. I’ll touch on this again, though, as I periodically do. I also really appreciate everyone who engaged it in a thoughtful way, especially from the Chinese side. These sorts of discussion, though they may prove frustrating or difficult, are vitally important.
I was watching BBC earlier, and this interviewer asked someone representing singapore how Singpapore has all these achievements but lacking freedom of speech and a viable two-party political system. The guy says, step back a little, the way you’re framing the question is presupposing that your social-political system is the absolute standard in this world.
I’ve said it many many times that this is the zenith of hypocracy and political hegemony of the West. They’re so stuck in their thinking that other nations, no matter how they develop, should eventually evolve into a system resembling the West’s.
I think this is the big rude awakening that’s waiting for the West, and I think they’re shocked that now, non-western nations are throwing this question back at them. The West is indeed in some shocking treatments in the near future.
Westerners should seriously start asking themselves why the rest of the world must evolve according to their ways. China is like Neo in the movie Matrix, take one pill to be a slave to the matrix and the West, or take the other pill to free itself from the hegemony of the West.
I would to hear some convincing arguments from the West why China or other nations should develop according the West’s liberal democratic system, other than the usual “universal values and human rights” bullshit.
One last thing: I would like to re-emphasize the point I made at the end of the post that Westerners really do need to be more considerate of how inwardly focused Chinese nationalism is, and that criticism from abroad that ignores the great concern and energy China focuses on its own perceived flaws risks is often received as the last straw that breaks the camels back. If you were talking to someone who faced enormous pressure and stress to succeed at home, you wouldn’t want to appear to be yet another person echoing to that pressure, would you? This doesn’t mean that the West cannot criticize China, but it does mean that it should choose its words carefully to express understanding and sympathy for the very intense and sometimes unreasonably harsh attitude China often has towards itself.
@Dave
Can we say that the 10,000 bussed in (at Chinese government expense) Han student protesters who turned up in Canberra last week to confront , harrasss, and assault the 2,000 pro-Tibet (not anti-Chinese) protestors at the torch relay were directing their nationalism inwardly? Its a very thoughtful and concerned point you make; but it seems if the chance arises this nationalist sentiment may also be projected outwards.
@James: But that was after perceived unfair criticism from abroad. That’s my point. Western media reports were seen as the last straw, but the last straw sits on top of a lot of other straws. All those others straw are domestic, to carry a lame analogy as far as I can take it. Whether the media has a responsibility to change this, I’m not so certain. But if you are an activist, or merely someone who is concerned about certain problems in China, you need to consider how to communicate.
Imagine you’re a student and you’re not doing so well in a class. You’re afraid you’re gonna flunk. Your parents, your teachers, the principal, your friends all bust your ass about it, that you’d better nail the last exam or you’re a big loser and you’re DOOMED. And then some random dude you’ve never met in your life walks up to you on the street and says “Man, you’re so failing that class”. It’s like a scene out of some 80s John Cusack movie, and at that point he snaps at the stranger. Wouldn’t you? That’s what it’s like, as far as I can see.
I still don’t understand the fascination with chest pounding nationalism into the 21st century. Europe’s success was not due to nationalism. Nationalism was a by-product of Europe’s geographical configuration. A natural kaleidoscope of state’s that developed, each becoming a laboratory for ideas and thought. Basically if one European king rejected a crazy idea, another would pick it up as a way to get ahead. This would in turn put pressure on the original one to either adopt the idea, try something else, or face decline.
Jared Diamond goes into detail with this, and I would say it’s probably the best attempt at creating a more rational view of world history.
And honestly an idea that has worked elsewhere should always be considered and attempted even in a limited fashion. It is simply obstinacy to repudiate an idea just because you don’t like the people that practice it.
BOB, let it go.
@davesgonechina,
I think shame plays such a large part of Chinese nationalism because of the current status of the Chinese nation.
Let’s just say I find it very disappointing and unfair that a nation like France, a nation 60 million strong and industrialized on the back of colonial resources/manpower, a nation that still has significant domestic problems… has the *ability* to influence Chinese interests and policy, a country 20 times its size. But indeed, that’s what France has today. It’s economy is only a little smaller than the Chinese economy; it’s a strong player in the UN, in NATO, in the WTO, the G8. Its military forces are deployed throughout colonial Africa.
France can’t dictate to China, but its an accurate statement to say that when France makes threats (no matter how irrational or unfair they might be), the government in Beijing does have to pay attention.
The “shame” aspect of Chinese nationalism will be erased when China no longer has any reason to fear punitive action from other nations. It doesn’t mean China can “ignore” the opinions of others; I hope China forever remains open to fair discussion and criticism of Chinese policies foreign and domestic. But it simply means that China no longer has to fear the club held by Western politicians. We’ve come a long way towards that goal over the last 30 years, but we’re still a long ways away from reaching true security.
I’ll repeat again what I said earlier about world democracy. Does it make sense that a country of 60 million, no matter how righteous they might feel their political philosophy might be, has such power over the worlds’ affairs? Democratic nations often take care to make sure that the wealthy minority can’t dictate politics; what about the democratic world?
@Jack,
Jared Diamond doesn’t get to give the only narrative for Europe’s rise. Europe’s rise coincided with its nationalistic, imperialistic policies.
@CCT: “I think shame plays such a large part of Chinese nationalism because of the current status of the Chinese nation.”
To me, this is treading really close to a tautology or circular reasoning. It’s like you’re saying Chinese are ashamed because they think China is something to be ashamed of.
As for France, I don’t exactly see France having some disproportionate influence over China compared to the reverse. France has three different major officials going separately to China in order to ease tensions. Sarkozy has two each delivering a personal letter of apology to Jin Jing. One has made clear the mayor of Paris had no authority to make the Dalai Lama an honorary citizen. Carrefour has stated it does not support Tibetan Independence. Seems to me France is taking alot of steps to reassure China that they value the relationship, and the biggest influence France has had on China is igniting a huge amount of resentment. That’s not because of France, that’s because of Chinese insecurities. I don’t see any reason for China to fear the club, let alone in the future. What honestly has the opposition managed to do to China so far? Have sponsors pulled out? Are athletes not coming? Are boycotts underway? What power have they exerted over China recently? The only power they’ve seemed to exert is offending Chinese people. That can be easily rectified; don’t care so much about what some protesters say or do. If the only influence they’ve been able to exert has been about your feelings, can’t you remedy that by controlling them?
Re: Nationalism and Imperialism: Jing mentioned Benedict Anderson before saying that nationalism is critical to forming communities. This is not quite what Anderson says. Anderson says that nationalism is a form of community, an imagined one, hence the title of his book Imagined Communities. He argues that nationalism was a result of literacy and print media, first of all, which allowed vernacular language to supplant Latin and thus when you read stuff in your language you imagined other people who know the same language and share the same culture as a nation, though you will never meet most of them.Colonialism and imperialism fueled nationalism, as imperial citizens abroad took the imagined community further across the world. But this is not the same as saying that imperialism was the result of nationalism.
Imperialism isn’t really the same as nationalism. In fact, nationalism has been at the center of every battle for independence from imperialism and colonialism. Imperialism, in my opinion, had alot more to do with racism, industrialization and European domestic wars than nationalism. Nationalism was probably a requirement for and reinforced by imperialism, as you had to define the nation that would be doing subjugating of others. But imperialism is not a nationalist endeavor, unless it is to expand the territory of the nation. India was part of the British Empire, but not the British nation. I think this is an important distinction.
I think much of the reason of Chinese sensitivity to outside criticism is that said criticism is often mixed with contempt for all things Chinese. Your blog and your readers are light years beyond most of the rest of the English language Chinese blogosphere, but I am a broad reader and I have seen innumerable examples of snide put downs, passive aggressive baiting, crypto-racial insults, etc (Nanheyangrouchuan being the penultimate example). If you really want to know when China has stood up, it will be when the criticism is leveled between equals and not as it presently is; from master to supplicant.
To give you an example of what I mean, take for example the historical criticism directed at Germany and Japan. You will find a strong racial undercurrent and sense of superiority and contempt from contemporary critics of Imperial Japan that is lacking compared to Nazi Germany.
Jack – in the West chest-pounding nationalism has been replaced by the very idea of the West – i.e. human rights, ‘freedom, etc. Nationalism only rears its head for racism, sporting events, various rivalries and humiliating each other before the UN/EU.
In the West the political class is perhaps the largest it has ever been, so there are many more decision-makers than before. They need something more to tie them together than ‘we hold the same passport’. That is why large chunks of the West see it as their manifest identity to stick together on certain issues. That the narrative of human rights and democracy is, on average, only about 60 years old means a lot of countries are not looking at their historic values (do Norwegians care/feel shame about the Vikings? No – that is aaaaaancient history), but have built a stronger relationship and identity on the concepts of freedom and democracy. It is boosted almost to the point where it is seen as ‘historically inevitable’ – we really are taught that nothing really mattered until the West became what it is now – the bastion of human rights and democracy.
This is, I guess, what a lot of the people here are disputing – the very idea that a recent idea ‘worked’ and is the end of history. The very idea that the Western nations are where they are today economically, socially and geo-politically *because* of democracy.
I have said before that I don’t believe nationalism is harmless – Chinese nationalism is no different from nationalism elsewhere. But it’s really too early to say China’s going to do the nasty on someone else because of nationalism (and let’s face it, the CCP is better placed to pour water on military talk than a very democratic government which truly reflected people’s inner desires – isn’t the whole point of socialism to reform people into better, ‘rational’ (ah that word – so often I hear it) beings?).
Finally, on Gallipoli. To tell you the truth, the Aussies have built this into an identity-building crux when it really deserves less. The comparison in China is more on the scale of the Sino-Vietnamese war. I.e. a military failure but not something with nasty ramifications for the homeland. Of course, if Australia had been invaded by the Japanese *that* would have been hardwired into the Aussie identity at a level far more fundamental than Gallipoli – and probably with the kind of bitterness which some Chinese seem to have.
Del3 said:
I understand that Australians have something they call the “The Great Stain” or it just “The Stain” of starting out as a penal colony that factored into Gallipoli.
Who are you to put words into my mouth. In my 40+ years in Australia, from birth to education in high schools and a university to a 20+ year working life, your comments are the first time I have heard this concept articulated.
It is very far from a universal concept, and I have interacted with country people as well as intellectuals.
Is it perhaps something you just made up?
@davesgonechina,
You mention you don’t believe France has a disporportionate amount of influence on China. I beg to differ. I personally believe that in a “fair” world, the implications of whether Sarkozy plans to attend the Beijing Olympics should be as significant as the question of whether the governer of Ningxia province (region, whatever) will be attending the London Games in 2012. Right now however, Sarkozy’s eventual decision will be widely broadcast and considered throughout the world. That’s a sign of the imbalance that still remains.
Eventually, given time, that will no longer be the case. Sarkozy will be seen as the elected representative of “only” 60 million people, 1% of the worlds’ population, and little more.
To me, this is treading really close to a tautology or circular reasoning. It’s like you’re saying Chinese are ashamed because they think China is something to be ashamed of.
Your original thesis begins with the implicit assumption that China has nothing to be ashamed of, and thus any sense of shame is a manufactured, false product.
I don’t think China is “shameful” (which is a rather harsh word) for nameless, wordless abstract concepts. I think modern China is still “shameful” because our GDP/capita is less than $3000 per person, because Chinese work far harder for far less pay when compared to their peers in the West, because we’re still mostly on the outside looking in with numerous international organizations, because we legitimately have concerns about foreign will being imposed on us by force… and most significantly in the recent context, because we are expected to modulate our own domestic policies based on the popular opinion of a continent with fewer people than our country.
So really, why would the Australians feel any sense of shame? Their standard of living is maintained by a simple 40 hour work-week, and their national security is guaranteed by close links with the British Commonwealth and a mutual defense treaty with the United States.
@CCT
I endorse Dave’s comments above. I just want to add the following:
The “shame” aspect of Chinese nationalism will be erased when China no longer has any reason to fear punitive action from other nations.
I keep reading this sentence over and over again. What country on earth can be without fear of external sanctions? You better get rid of sense of entitlement to greatness and you would feel a lot better.
Does it make sense that a country of 60 million, no matter how righteous they might feel their political philosophy might be, has such power over the worlds’ affairs?
Well first of all, just echo, what Dave said are you not exaggerating France influence over world affairs. The question you should really ask is: Does it make sense that a party with only 70 million members can dictate the fate over a nation of 1.3 billion citizens?
And as far as France is concerned, I am quite comfortable with France’s role in world affairs since France is accountable to the world community through a number of treaties and organizations that both China and the US refuses to join. China has a lot to learn from France.
@Dave
thanks for yr response. Yu are a man of great empathy- may it be spread around.
@CCT
The “shame” aspect of Chinese nationalism will be erased when China no longer has any reason to fear punitive action from other nations.
What country on earth is immune from “punitive action from other nations”?
Does it make sense that a country of 60 million, no matter how righteous they might feel their political philosophy might be, has such power over the worlds’ affairs?
As Dave has already said, you should not exaggerate France’s influence in the world. But the question you should really ask is if it does make sense that a political party of 70 million should have such power of a nation of 1.3 billion people.
To extent that France does have some influence over world affairs, I am quite comfortable with that situation. Being party to several international organizations and treaties, France is much more accountable to the world community than either China or the United States. China actually has a lot to learn from France
Oh this is great. I only started commenting online and mostly on Peking Duck, a few days ago because of what happened in the last month. It was fun to quickly get to know a number of people (IDs, actually). It’s also interesting to see all the familiar names showing up here in this thread. Of course, the lack of certain other names, *COUGH* cathy *COUGH*, is a good thing too.
Anyway, is there a formal place like a forum where such discussions can be held without following the current entries in some blogs? (To be sure, these are GOOD blogs).
Wow, it ain’t easy being Chinese, and you ain’t kidding.
Found the war reparation figures for silver, and it comes out to present day value apx. US$2,641,680,000. I am corrected that wasn’t over 200 years, but 60 years.
Couldn’t find the figure for gold, @ $800/oz that might hurt even more.
While reading this blog, I accidentally came across these words of Lu Xun, the Chinese writer who wrote “In his inferiority, a Chinese person is a slave; in his arrogance, he is a tyrant.”
By the way, I’m just new to your blog and enjoyed it.
BTW, has anyone ever calculated the present worth of the wealth extracted from China thru colonialism? Never mind the things that are hard to count, such as loss of national progress, cost of lives and suffering.
How about just what’s written down? Like all the billions of tallies of gold/silver paid as war reparations. That can be tracked down, as the treaties are in recorded history.
Related discussions:
The Creationist Myth of Chinese Nationalism
http://blog.speak4china.com/?p=42
The Chinese people and the Chinese government
http://blog.speak4china.com/?p=23
Jess – it’s just as easy to use past shames to attack the CCP as it is to attack the West. Guess what? Neither tells the whole story.
The point is I’m sure many Mainlanders feel they need to show the West something. Especially as the West holds itself out with freedom, democracy, human rights and the rest of it. It’s a war of ideas or culture. Russia simply doesn’t figure as a contender here.
Of course nationalism is politics-oriented. No-one would ever use nationalism to implode a country. So they don’t focus on the less salubrious elements which come from within. When things calm down and the slow and painful process of opening up continues, Chinese will face these truths in their own time.
YH: “Here, all of the communication seems civilized…”
Jing: “Peanut Butter you stupid illiterate git, go scurry back to the Chans where you belong with the rest of the internet’s wapanese dingleberries.”
A wild ad hominem appears!
@Cindy6
I don’t have a clue of that how did you made the assumption about me, if you were familiar with the “junk by clueless western journalists”, you should have known some discrepancies in the arguments. Actually my thoughts had been formed long before the troublesome 08 Olympics Torch Relay.
Indeed, our sense of nationalism isn’t brought up recently, it orignated one hundred years ago during the time our country had been bullied by west, including Japan and Russia. I don’t need to repeat the same fact as it’d been already said in previous comments many times. Just because I didn’t mention it doesn’t mean I was inclined to deny it.
The gist of my point is that today’s nationalism sentiment is politics-oriented. Notice that Russia imperialist forced China(Qing empire) conceded territory of total 144 sq.km. through a serial of unequal treaties (Treaty of Aigun,Convention of Peking,Sino-Russian northwestern Boundary Treaty,Li-Lobanov Treaty,etc.), it’s 40 times big of Taiwan, plus the independence of Outer Mongolia agitated by Russia, we lost 294 sq.km.’s land for the sake of Russia empire. And their successor Soviet Union never return any bit of it, they were smart enough to sponsor Chinese communist’s rebellion, playing the role as our big brother. Even the following Russian Federation knew how to bargain for real interests with their mouth shut (two treaties in 1999 and 2001,PRC officially regonised Russia’s sovereign rights over most of those territory. I donot see much mainland Chinese have any problem of that,or being shame of that.
Another tricky truth: in the first three decades since PRC founded, because of its minimal participation in anti-japanese war, CCP intended to underweight the bloody conflict between the two countries in history education, not even a word in textbook mention the notorious Nanjin massacre until early 80s.
If we do have the dignity of being a nationalist/patriot and behave consistently, how the culture genocide would have been carried out by our own people in the Culture Revolution. True nationalists/patriots value and reserve their tradition even they have to learn and adapt to foreign culture.
As to the term “shame”, I strongly recommend these two referrence sites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame_society
http://www.doceo.co.uk/background/shame_guilt.htm
Compared with its definition, the “shame” we touting today is mainly about our ego, and nationalism just magnify one’s ego up to nation’s level.
The sad fact is that Europe, America and its people never learn and I think history is again repeating itself in the Islamist jihadist movement, which I feel is a response to Western meddling in Middle Eastern countries’ internal affairs. The West was not happy when Persia had a popular and democratically elected socialist Leader who wanted to nationalise the oil industry to benefit the people.
So the Brits and the Americans conspire to overthrow him and install the Shah, who did nothing for the people but cater to Western oil interest. The Shah was then in turn overthrown by the people who install an Islamic leader perceived to better represent the people’s interests. What did the West then do? They went and support Saddam Hussein to invade Iran!!! And when Saddam Hussein wanted his payment in the form of Kuwait and became unpliable, they then go and invade Iraq on trump up charges of supporting Al-Qaeda and of possessing WMD.
Frankly Americans and Europeans, their governments and NGOs should really get over their own anxiety, sense of insecurity, righteousness, hypocrisy and colonial guilt-induced, white man’s burden, overwrought sense of “do-goodiness” cum Christian charity and leave other people to sort out their own affairs. If the people of Somalia want an Islamic government, then let them. If the Venezuelans want a Socialist government next election, then why not? If the Sudanese Arabs want to kill Sudanese Africans, then let them, for the Khartoum government will then have to answer to its neighbours. Let them learn the true costs of their actions and may it forever be etched in their memory.
People never seem to learn that the road to ruin is paved with good intentions. (For the Trekkies out there, maybe Gene Roddenberry was right with the Prime Directive after all)
Sorry, for the off-topic rant I really have had enough of Mia Farrow, the Dalai Lama and Merkel and Sarkozy et al’s holier than thou bollocks rightousness. And if the CCP don’t do right by the people, whether Han Chinese or Tibetan Chinese, they too can go scr*w themselves.
I shall go and learn to take a deep breath again after all that…..sorry…
OT – you put it better than I ever could. The fact is communism in Asia came about for a reason – which was as a reaction to the ravages which people faced. They were unhappy with the old order which they felt was either complicit in their problems or unable to deal with them.
If people had waved a ‘democracy flag’ at the people in ’45-’49 it really wouldn’t have meant as much as revolution. Put yourself in these people’s shoes.
It was and as in the interest of the West that communism fails. Utterly and entirely. And the West tried many ways of making this happen. The most successful is to provoke a crisis of security. Almost all the communist regimes suffer this and spend all their time and energy battling foes, real and phantom. Obviously the most stark example is North Korea. Can you tell the North Koreans to rein in their nationalism just like that? No. Not primarily because it is encouraged by their government, but because it is in reaction to a sense of continuous threat from outside. A threat which does exist. Hence the resultant polarisation.
It’s all very easy saying if we all lowered the nationalism, lowered the guard, dismantled the system and brushed the chip off our shoulder all would be great, but in fact the very act of asking for this to happen creates the polarisation itself.
As for the concept of shame in Chinese culture, this is intricately tied up with the Confucian concept of “virtue” or the “virtuous gentleman”. Although Confucianism is no longer taught in school in China or overseas, very much of Confucian ethics remain with us in the form of what parents teach their kids in terms of our duty, obligations and social and personal expectations, except that we no longer consciously sees it as Confucian, but more as being what it means to be Chinese.
The role of shame in the context of this thread has two origins. Firstly, the Chinese people traditionally have VERY high expectations of their leaders and the authorities because of the traditional lack of structural checks and balances on the exercise and abuse of power and authority in imperial Chinese government ethics.
This expectation is bound in the concept of the paternalistic “virtuous” scholar official of ancient China. The shame that people feel is that at the fall of the Qing dynasty the Imperial Government did not lived up to this expectation. It failed in its duty and obligation to protect the Empire and its people and to stand up for its own against perceived culturally inferior foreigners. It is akin to the shame a child feel of a parent who failed to provide for or to defend the child.
The second origin of this shame lies within the individual in that the person feels shame because he/she failed to live up to his duty and obligations to our parents, our ancestors and our “nation” to defend what is “ours and mine”. The shame felt is that we were not good enough at what we did, for to excel, to be competitive is also part of the Confucian ideal of being “virtuous”, so consequently we too feel shame for the nation’s failure and humiliation. It is the shame of personal failure, for having failed short of our own and others’ expectations of our duty and obligations.
However, the irony is that Confucian ethics actually have very little to say about the role of shame in society, but rather it is perhaps a natural extension of human nature. Very often the combination of shame and the striving to be “virtuous” have led many to erred and mistook false virtue and the obsession with “saving face” as being “virtuous”, such as the mindless pursuit of material wealth, success and glory to equate as being “virtuous”.
In actual fact this false and materialistic virtue and the idea of “saving face” is simply a façade that we use to hid our inadequacies and of having fallen short. Whereby to “give face” is to accept that the other person has fallen short, but we as a “truly virtuous” person should not rub it in or openly enjoy shadenfreude at the other person’s expense and discomfort in order to maintain social harmony and decorum.
In reality and in the compromise that we make in daily lives we all too often forget that true virtue is actually found in our relationships to people, our conduct and our actions, irrespective of materialistic and superficial trappings such as titles, honours or positions.
On a separate note, it is also interesting to note that the concept of shame and “saving face” is NOT unique to the Chinese society, but can also be found to varying degree in all societies. It is especially prevalent in what are still essentially Confucian societies of Japan, Korea, Vietnam etc., although they may have different labels for it or express it differently. Shame and “face” can also be found in Western societies, except that there it is ameliorated by the Christian concept of forgiveness of sins and transgression, thus providing absolution from the guilt of having fallen short or transgressed.
However, I also agree with many of YH’s perspective.
‘Shame’? No, I don’t think so. I don’t think ‘shame’ is the mountain suppressing or obessing the Chinese people.To me, these texts just shows and proves a few things:
One thing is from the culture: 居安思危(Thinks of danger in peace). In the past 100 years, Chinese people had little pleased time. Because of the poverty, famines, wars, and political turmoil in China over the past century, hardship, rather than happiness, had been the only sure promise of life. People are used to preparing for hard times.
Another thing revealed is: Chinese people are still insecure(We can dig the reaosn also from the history). In the past 20-30 years, the life get better, but this insecurity is planted very deep and for long time into people’s mind, so it’s not totally removed away. Maybe others see China as strong, but we, the people still live, more or less, under the shade.
We’re forgetting and overcoming these historical disadvantages, and to tell the truth whatsoever I can say, Chinese people don’t carry these burdens moving on in their lives. Until others point fingers(Some are the directioned & oriented fingers) towards us, which could remind all of the ‘shame ‘, arouse our insecurity, and ‘press’ harder on the ‘burdens’.
To me, it’s not like ‘a straw breaks camel’s back’, but ‘salt on the old wound’. In Germany, many and many medias report only negative news about China, and many of them are nonsense. Chinese people feel confused: We’re trying hard to be better, but why others don’t like us?
Dalai Lama’s voice occupies everywhere.Only one voice is speaking. The Chinese people usually are quite and only focus on their affairs. And when this time they are not that peaceful as before, also want to speak, then they earn a name of ‘extreme nationalism’.(Here, I have to say, some over-the-top Chinese did some stupid things, and I prefer call it stupidity, but not extreme nationalism)
I didn’t read all of the comments, if I repeat something, pls just ingore me.
@Jess,
You’ve been reading too much junk by clueless western journalists lately. Nationalism, far from a genie let loose by the commies after communism failed, was what propelled them to power!
Taiwanese were mentioned in some comments, so pls allow me to contribute my two coins.
When Jiang Jieshi(Chiang Kai-shek) fled to Taiwan, he brought all of the ‘Money Foreign exchange Reserve'(I’m not sure how to phrase it, sorry) around 275 million USD, and another 500 million USD valued gold(2.78 million Liang) and jewellery. According to some data, it said at that time, oversea Chinese donated around 100 million USD to KMT. All of these is the base of the Taiwan’s economy. Contemporanely new China only had around 6000 Liang gold reserve(and the new Chinese gov. also carried the economic burden, to take back the KTM gov’s currency which was issued to grab people’s gold and money away by KMT, to stablize people’s lives).
And for the safty, Taiwan has America this ‘friend’ to protect it.
So Taiwan’s situation is quite different. They didn’t suffer war, famine, and they also don’t worry about the security, to them, maybe they would like west(America) more than mainland China.
I don’t think there are lots of Taiwanese would behave similar as Chinese from PRC. As for this issue, no need to debate.
This morning I just read a news: A foreign journalist wanted to interview a peasant who is complaining to higher level gov. agaisnt the local gov. which took her earth away, but she turn down the interview with an answer: ‘I have nothing to tell you, I love my country’. Und I also read a report from a German big ecnomic news paper this week, which interviewed a construction worker(he was a farmer). Between the lines, even through his life is not great, implies he loves China and he has hopes and faith in the future. So not only these netizen, please don’t assume.
My English is not good, and my reading speed is not fast, so I haven’t read all of comments yet. I will continue to read them later. Now have to go to do some other things.
One thing I have to say is: Here, all of the communication seems civilized, not like some other places where people just shout at each other and end up with insult. 🙂
@ Jess
People need to stop viewing Communism through the prism of Cold War ideology and mentality that has been fostered through Western education and the mass media. Without intending to defend Communism, the birth of Communist/Socialist ideology in Asia, from Persia/Iran to North Korea, is actually intertwined with anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiment rather than being outright anti-democracy or anti-freedom per se. After WWII USSR’s actions in Eastern Europe, which was motivated more by her own national security interest, was interpreted by America’s conservative and religious right as being expansionist and “anti-god”, thus causing America’s failure to distinguish the different domestic reasons why Communism came into being in Asia, Africa and S. America. All Communist movements were regarded by America’s religious right as the same, irrespective of the reasons that gave rise to these movements and it didn’t help that in response the USSR out of its own narrow interest took its conflict with America to the developing world.
Communism in China, Vietnam and N Korea were a product of this anti-colonial and anti-imperialist sentiment because of the perceived failure of Nationalists and Republicans to resist foreign aggression. It was regarded simply as the best way to unite the people and to concentrate resources to resist/overthrow foreign domination and to catch up with the West economically and technologically. The truth is that Communism failed not because it was inherently incapable of social or economic development, but because its resources went into defence and security rather than the economy and the society. The perceived external threat also created a society that was riddled with paranoia and suspicion thereby sapping the people’s motivation and energy, while the security imperative forced people to lie about their true performances.
A point missing here: the damage caused by the civil war (we call it liberation war解放战争）and every political movement led by CCP (great leap forward大跃进，anti－rightist campaigns反右运动，culture revolution文化大革命，etc.） are far more severe than that by any foreign colonization and invasion, just see the statistic on abnormal death. If I should have something to shame of, more likely, to introspect, I’ll ask why my compatriot liked to make up a bunch of excuses to persecute each other.
Pardon me for being sarcastic, the foundation of our nation was based on hatred and resentment, not just towards west imperialists, another group of Chinese was target also. Ever heard of Class Hatred(阶级仇恨） or Class Struggle（阶级斗争）？It’s contradictable to apply today’s anti-west sentiment to explain that why people back then were so zealous about their cause of communism–liberating west proletariate from the brutal tyranny of capitalists.
Since the day of “reform and opening-up”, the capitalist economy kicked in, CCP knew no one would buy marxism anymore, thus nationalism (usually covered by a more honorable term “patriotism”)became our new ideology and government’s new guarantee of legitimacy. Still, the logic is the same, our love for China is based on hatred and resentment deriving from historical humiliation, imaginary enemies, foreign threats whatsoever…
I understand the reason government have been doing, after all it’s a shabby remedy for the destruction of our traditional value and social norm, but it really worries me, nationalism is double-edged sword, finally the hatred and resentment will comsume us.
Peanut Butter,
Who is blaming you for a “not-so-powerful-China”? If the Chinese could blame you or anybody else for their problems, they wouldn’t be ashamed, would they?
Peanut Butter you stupid illiterate git, go scurry back to the Chans where you belong with the rest of the internet’s wapanese dingleberries.
The last 70 or so comments were discussing precisely why Chinese nationalism is focused inwards toward strengthening the Chinese race due to their own perceived weakness.
The world doesn’t owe you anything. That’s what a lot of Chinese seemingly have yet to learn. It’s not our fault that China is not as powerful or as wealthy as the West; it’s the fault of the corruption and incompetence of Beijing’s leaders from the Manchus to the current bunch.
But why look for the source of the rot when you can just blame whitey?
Oh, and you can thank us again for stopping Japan.
Dave,
Could it be something that Confucianism preaches? You know, “知耻而后勇”? I for one don’t think feeling a lot of shame is a bad thing. It keeps the Chinese from being complacent.
Peanut Butter,
Wow, what a fascist! Hitler surely used the reasons as you provided to support his war plans.
@Peanut Butter,
And the Germans are wise to have “gotten over” Versailles. They have the worlds’ third largest economy, and correspondingly one of the worlds’ highest standards of living. Why cry over spilled milk when you own a dairy farm?
I’ll repeat my point again. China’s “shame” (which is both domestic and foreign) will be irrelevant and forgotten only when we regain our fair share of the worlds’ wealth and influence.
Remembering need not equate to obsessing over it. The Germans seem to have gotten over Versailles by now.
Definitely, we shall never forget, and never again. This humiliation is too deep and too oppressively repugnant for us to forget. We have a long way to go and a lot of work to do.
My take on this is it’s not so much “shame”, rather “never forget”.
After centuries of self-sufficiency China was invaded and carved up by the west and had its wealth extracted for 200 years. I was told the Chinese character for numbers didn’t go high enough when the West demanded war reparations, “Wan-Wan” was used to describe the astronomical number of tallies of gold/silver demanded.
The word “billion/Zhao”, was invented to pay war reparations.
I for find it reasonable that the Chinese never want to forget this part of their hisotry.
BTW, Bo Yang has just passed away, sigh, and I wasn’t criticizing him at all by saying he is only a little child compared to Lu Xun. I like many of his works.
Dave,
“But I am sure that the narrative of humiliation, and the duty of everyone to feel personal resentment and anger about it, is a fundamental part of 100% of students history curriculums.”
I was a Chinese student myself, and I still have most of my history textbooks on my shelves. Maybe you can provide some excerpts from the history textbooks to explain why you are so sure?
Dave,
Sometimes what you see is not necessarily the fundamental cause. You are asking why Chinese people keep emphasizing the shame they had experienced in recent history, well, they might actually be emphasizing the glory before that instead. Inside every Chinese, the deep proud of having been the strongest country in the world for 4000 years (in certain periods among them arguably not, but only arguably) is unimaginable by outsiders. Most of the outsiders view Chinese history the same way we view Indian or Pesian history: long, interesting, mystyrious, that’s it. This is the fundamental difference in context we view the phenomenon of our “feeling shame”.
I don’t want to be rude, so correct me if I’m wrong, and I’ll apologize, but AFAIK most of the Australian history was not the most glorious time, so it’s very understandable that they want to “create some sense of triumph” out of even a failed battle to strengthen their proudness of their country, as a way to maintain patriotism. In China, it’s the opposite, most of the Chinese history was glorious, and we need to remind ourselves of the recent shame to keep us awakened, motivated, and recognize that there is still a long way to go.
When we talk about the shame, we do not really feel shameful, because the compelling sense of glory is so deep in our minds. And look at the polls, Chinese people are proud of their country more than most others on the planet. We are so deeply proud of the country that, even if many of us hate the CCP, we still stand by it if the criticism from outside comes with any remote hint of contempt on China and its people.
Charles Liu,
Indeed. I insist that our history books are actually quite fair, and if our students feel “shame” after their history education it mainly comes from the history itself, not the way it was taught. If the education places any “artificial” feeling of the Chinese history and people on students’ minds, it would be the massive selection of Lu Xun’s articles in the language courses. It’s not to say his articles are bad or biased, but they are too deep that young students can hardly understand their true implications. But anyone who really want to understand the Chinese humanity has to read Lu Xun, before whom Bo Yang is no more than a little child.
Before Bo Yang, one of the father of modern Chinese literature, Lu Xun, raised the issue with his “rotten/fermented soul” criticism regarding China’s collective mentality.
If people really want to understand China and the Chinese peoples, whether in China or Overseas Chinese, whether recent emigrants or 4th / 5th generation, I would suggest that they ignore Communist ideology and rhetoric, but instead look at Confucian ethics, its development among the people and China’s history. Everything else is just window dressing.
@Dave
Why should they feel shame for ancestors who fought to protect their homeland simply because they lost?
The quick answer is they shouldn’t have lost.
We have a high (some would even argue an inflated) opinion of ourselves, and hence high expectations. It’s particularly shameful to be beaten by barbarians (or Japanese*_^). Someone had already mentioned 岳飞. He was tattooed, by his own mother, on his back as a reminder of a similar military defeat that was known as the Shame of the Year Jing Kang （1127AD). Literature from those times was full of this “shame” reference.