The time has come to start writing my Sinology project for SOAS this year and I’ve decided to focus on Nationalism. The reasons for why are complicated yet fascinating and I will be sure to elaborate on my reaction to them when I complete the project. However, for now, read my proposal and let me know what your thoughts are in a comment or an e-mail.

Bearing in mind the initial thoughts laid out at the beginning of my post, what has Chinese nationalism developed into and what does it mean today? With the absence of a common enemy such as the Soviet Union with which the government can use to unite the people against in a nationalistic campaign, why is nationalism still so prevalent, even with the new generation? I’m going to focus on the following areas:

• China’s “Angry Youth” (“fen qing” 愤青) - the role of the new generation of Chinese nationalists and how they are using the internet to communicate, organise and spread nationalism.
• The cultivation of nationalism by the government and the consequent balancing act between controlling, but not upsetting, the populace should any policy be introduced that could directly harm national interests.
• China’s need to ‘prove itself’ on a modern stage. For example, when China completed its first spacewalk, the emphasis was all placed on how it compared to the earlier achievement of the USA, rather than measuring on its own merit. Is this an example of an inferiority complex?
• Incidences where nationalism has suddenly increased of its own accord. For example: the Olympics, the torch relays, the Sichuan earthquake, riots in Tibet, boycotting of foreign goods etc.
• What focal point will nationalism take now that the Olympics has finished? Will it continue to grow without the help of the government and, if so, what does that mean for political stability?

Let me know your thoughts. In the meantime, you may want to check out this article by Evan Osnos in the New Yorker for further reading.

It is quite incredible to think that a man who lived so long ago, a time whereupon in the UK we were building walls made from mud around what was a tiny hamlet later to be known as ‘London’, had such a timeless and sharp analysis of the relationship between a government and its people. In The Zhuang Zi, the book written by Zhuang Zi and allegedly some of his followers, frequent references are made to the opposition of the rule of large government, not just poetic Daoist poems.

In ‘Let it Be, Leave it Alone’, a title that quite literally shares the translation of the political term ‘Laissez-Faire’, Zhuangzi opens with a classically libertarian comment on jurisdiction:

“I have heard of letting the world be, of leaving it alone; I have never heard of governing the world. You let it be for fear of corrupting the inborn nature of the world; you leave it alone for fear of distracting the Virtue of the world. If the nature of the world is not distracted, why should there be any governing of the world?”

It’s important we remember that the nature of the ‘world’ in this case is world of the Warring States and ‘nature’, it could therefore be argued, refers to society in its natural, uninterrupted state. It would seem that the passage is implying that the intervention with or artificial control of society by a government can consequently upset it’s temperament - as was the very case during the Warring States period. Additionally, some contemporary libertarians have gone so far as to suggest it is this very passage that epitomises Zhuangzi’s anarchic tendencies and shows he embellished a devotion to laissez faire and opposition to state rule, something he will have no doubt got from ‘Lao Zi’ (also known as Lao-Tzu in another romanisation of Chinese), his ‘master’. Whilst this indeed implies Zhuangzi took inspiration from his predecessors, the importance in this case should be stressed on his political, not spiritual influence when the political situation is taken into account. Furthermore, although some schools of thought have argued that Zhuangzi should be interpreted only as literature on a superficial or even religious level, it is also important we understand and contextualise the environment and politics of the period of history in which it was written and how this may have affected the prose.

It is this anti-government rhetoric can only be a reaction to the distress Zhuangzi saw in society around him, as the competitive governments of the Warring States battled for control over each other and imposed their own ideas on other cultures in an effort to gain further power. As an intellectual and former official and government insider, it’s likely Zhuangzi will have expressed his frustrations in his texts in order to voice and preserve his opposition.

Many of Zhuangzi’s philosophies also address the issue of personal perception which, when modeled on society, offers an interesting insight into the importance of seeing the world through other eyes. One of Zhaung Zi’s more well-known piece of prose is, on face value, seemingly quite bizarre. In short, Zhuang Zi dreams he is a butterfly and wakes up to question whether or not he is actually awake or if he is a butterfly dreaming he is Zhuang Zi, waking up. Quite a head-twister that one. 

“Once Chuang Chou dreamt he was a butterfly, a butterfly flitting and fluttering around, happy with himself and doing as he pleased. He didn’t know he was Chuang Chou. Suddenly he woke up and there he was, solid and unmistakeable Chuang Chou. But he didn’t know if he was Chuang Chou who had dreamt he was a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming he was Chuang Chou. Between Chuang Chou and a butterfly there must be some distinction! This is called the Transformation of Things.”

The element of perception is fairly apparent when considered alongside the other libertarian connotations of the book of Zhuangzi. That is to say, Zhuangzi could have also been commenting on the importance on viewing oneself and others from a different perspective, rather than just focusing on oneself in an individualistic, self-interested way. Politically, this ties in to the libertarian need for the people and government to recognise and appreciate the differences between each other and cultural boundaries. This again rallies against the kind of political expediency practiced by governments during the Warring States period that disregarded differences between cultures and people in favour of a purely self-interested, almost neo-conservative policy of governing for social and economic profit.

There’s a chance Zhuangzi may have chosen to use odd and cryptic metaphors like this in his writing as a consequence of his apparent frustration with the situation he found himself living in. That is to say, Zhuangzi could have been humoring and mocking those he felt responsible for the crises of the Warring States in the way he knew best: the non-action, Daoist way and the power of intellect!

This issue of perception is dealt with in Zhuangzi again in a later chapter regarding a conversation he has with fellow philosopher Hui zi:

“Chuang Tzu and Hui Tzu were strolling along the dam of the Hao River when Chuang Tzu said, “See how the minnows come out and dart around where they please! That’s what fish really enjoy!” Hui Tzu said, “You’re not a fish-how do you know what fish enjoy?” Chuang Tzu said, “You’re not I, so how do you know I don’t know what fish enjoy?” Hui Tzu said, “I’m not you, so I certainly don’t know what you know. On the other hand, you’re certainly not a fish-so that still proves you don’t know what fish enjoy!” Chuang Tzu said, “Let’s go back to your original question, please. You asked me how I know what fish enjoy-so you already knew I knew it when you asked the question. I know it by standing here beside the Hao.”

Once again, Zhuangzi argues the point that you cannot possibly understand how someone else thinks or works without perceiving them from another point of view. There is also an additional argument regarding the fact that Zhuangzi claims to understand the fish by ‘standing here beside the [river] Hao’. That is to say, without being up-close to the fish and sharing their environment, he would otherwise be unable to gauge their emotions. When viewed in context, one could apply the same rules to society. Due to their isolated and aristocratic nature, the leaders of the Warring States governments were far removed from the people under their control.

This led to a complete separation of the power from the people as is the case under an authoritarian government such as the Warring States governments. A parallel could be drawn between the relationship between Zhuangzi and the fish with that of the government and the people. Zhuangzi was clearly intending to illustrate the fact that, if the rulers were to lower themselves to the same level as the people below them and selflessly become immersed in their environment, only then would they be able to see that understanding what promotes harmony within the people, is ultimately what promotes harmony throughout society as a whole. 
This article was edited together from an essay I wrote for the SOAS Chinese History & Culture course

the lottery of numbers

To Westerners, the date 08/08/08 has little significance other than it’s aesthetically pleasing and is a nice coincidence. However, in China (as some may know from a popular HSBC advert that ran in the UK) the number 8 is considered extremely lucky. So a date such as the opening ceremony of the Olympics is really rather special indeed. But where there’s good luck, there’s bad luck. The number 13 is so unlucky that, in some cases, floor 13 ceases to exist in certain skyscrapers. The number 4 (四) is also to be avoided as much as possible on license plates and in phone numbers as it shares its pronunciation with ’si’ (死), meaning death.

Whilst 2009 should be considered a lucky year (9 bringing good luck as it sounds the same as the Chinese for ‘long-lasting’ - 久), there is reason for those who are superstitious within the government to be on edge. According to some Sinologists, following the trends of large-scale protests in China in years ending in ‘9′, such as the demonstrations of 1919 and 1989, Chinese superstition would justify erring on the side of caution. That’s not to say of course that, just because we’re about to enter into 2009, we’re due for civil unrest!

However, it is true to say that 2009 could arguably be a more interesting year, politically, culturally and economically than 2008.

superwealth

It’s important to remember that China’s new place within the world doesn’t rest on internal economic growth alone. Following presidential elections in the U.S. this November and the inauguration of a president with a new foreign policy (one that is more likely to give in to gentle pressure from a new generation of isolationists who would prefer less involvement in world affairs), we could see China climb the superpower ladder faster than we expected, something the American is most likely scared of, as the above picture from the front cover of the international magazine ‘The Economist’ cheekily demonstrates.

New wealth means new culture. As has already been apparent by the rise of a new middle class of Chinese people over the last few years. The demand from the new middle classes of Western goods and lifestyles has given birth to a fascinating sub-culture in China. Today, I happened across a news item on French television that featured a little girl who was a budding future Olympic gymnast in Wuhan. I knew the ‘看法’ (outlook) of the new generation had well and truly changed in China when she declared that it was a BMW that she wanted more than anything else in life, rather than her achieving her dream of becoming an Olympic athlete.

Additionally, there have been reports in the Western media of the cost of living in Beijing rocketing to astronomical levels. Yes, hotel prices are now almost on a par with the likes of London and it’s true you can pick up a (real) Louis Vuitton handbag in Beijing for in excess of $4000, but you can still eat for as little as $0.50 a day. Why? Because of the army of migrant workers from other parts of China who have travelled thousands of miles to construct Beijing in preparation for the Olympics and, with them, they’ve brought their own micro economy. As the gap between those of wealth and citizens of a less well off background grows notable larger, the government will have a the delicate job of satisfying two entirely different classes with different needs and different social structures. Will this lead to a decline in the otherwise laissez-faire economic policy we’ve seen so far?

nationalism

The final factor to consider is that of Nationalism. Pride in one’s country has always been very strong in China, extremely strong in same cases. Some historians have argued that the one of the reasons the Nationalists lost to the Communists during the Chinese civil war was because the Communists were actually better at being Nationalists than the Nationalists were!

In the run up to Beijing 2008, new sayings and expressions have risen in Chinese that stress huge importance on how the Olympics must be a success and a good impression of China must be painted. But, the question is, after the sporting dust has settled and China yet again develops in a new direction, where will all the nationalism go? Who/what will it rally around?

Contrary to popular opinion, perhaps power really does lie within the people in China - despite a lack of democracy. It could be argued the nationalism could potentially go so strong, the government themselves fears the people - not the other way round - as, if the government does something that could harm the masses and is ‘un-patriotic’, this cultivated nationalism could turn against them.

This is the delicate balancing act of 2009, a year which I will watch unfold with upmost fascination.