Chinese nationalism

The term of Nationalisme Chinese refers to the movements, Croyance S and theories Politique, historical, Géographique and cultural which support the idea of a Culture and of a Peuple Chinese single and plain. One of the difficulties which this Interprétation raises are many ambiguities which recover the Chinese term.

Ideological base

Chinese nationalism was formed many and various Influence S, among which the Chinese traditional thought (tinted Confucianisme), the American Progressisme, the Marxisme, or the ethnological thought Russian. This Idéologie besides is often put in front of various manners, and, sometimes, conflict, astonishing fact made possible by the Syncrétisme of which the Chinese make proof traditionally.

Although the majority of the Chinese nationalists are from the start put of agreement on the importance to have a centralized government, almost all the other questions were the occasion of intense and sour debates. Thus, the questions of working out the policies reinforcing the country, of organizing the State and of laying down objectives and orientations to him, to define the relations and attitudes to be adopted with respect to the foreign powers like defining the relation and attitude of the Hans with respect to the local Minority S and of the Chinese Diaspora were as many sources of important divisions.

The astonishing faculty of Chinese nationalism to appear in manner so different (and sometimes even very divergent) was raised by many commentators for whom those reveal an obvious lack of consistency. However of others consider the various orientations preached in turn by the nationalist ideology as a quality which enables him to adapt and to change according to the internal crises or of the international events.

Although there exist many differences between the nationalist groups, those share essential common points. All hold Sun Yat-SEN in very high regard, and rather tend to proclaim their common heritage coming from the Three Principles of the People. The Democracy and the Science are commonly proposed by all the nationalists, although they can then have each one an interpretation different from the fact that is the democracy.

Chinese unit conscience

The Chinese adhered during centuries to the idea of a unit Chinese State; this concept was then perceived like a need, thus preserving the civilized world (“Empire of the Medium”, Zhong Guo, China) of the barbarians of outside, i.e. rest of the world. Vis-a-vis this irrefutable fact, the Chinese population federated around a strong State. Certain authors released from strong resemblances between the operation of the Popular republic of China (RPC) current and that of the old dynasties, such as the dynasty of the Ming and the Qing. Lucyan Pye however supports the opposite thesis, namely that the organization of this modern State-nation was radically émancipé of the old models of State of the Empire of the Medium.

Nationalism and Ethnicité in China

To establish the relation between the ethnicity and the Chinese identity was an main issue during the formation of the empire. At the 17th century, the Mandchous (people of the North-East, external with the kingdom) invaded the center of China and seized the power, establishing the Qing dynasty. During the following centuries, they took the control of other areas and people, in the west (Tibetans, Ouighours), and in north (Mongolian). In order to allow the good performance of the widened State, the Manchus had to solve this double problem: to maintain the honesty of the populations (sometimes very far away from the capital) to the kingdom, without to assimilate populations and to preserve the specific identities to each people. With this intention, they gave the indication of wise confucéens enlightened, guarantors of the safeguarding and the continuity of the Chinese Civilization. To the wire of the centuries, the Manchus were compared thus little by little to the Chinese culture, and by doing this, much of Manchous were identified as being Chinese.

The complexity of the relation ethnicity - Chinese identity can be illustrated by the historical episode of the rebellion of Taiping. This battle opposed the troops of the Manchus, being posed as guards Chinese traditional values, with the rebels of the kingdom, who were considered, them, as foreign barbarians (when well even their membership of the kingdom was former to that of the Manchus). The combat, impassioned, were of an extreme violence, surely because of the importance which then the two adversaries attached to the defense of this Chinese identity of which each one stood as guarantor. It is at that time that Chinese the han term developed, like a means of identifying the majority of the Chinese.

At the 19th century, the Révolte of the Boxers burst following the control of the country to the foreign powers by the means of the Dynastie Qing: drawing from the funds mythical of ancestral China, the movement did not manage however to constitute the base of a nationalism to the modern direction of the term, which appeared at the same time in the majority of the European nations. Resistance to the foreign invader and the will of political autonomy gradually fed the debates of the Chinese intellectuals, decided to regain sovereignty on their country.

After the revolution of 1911 taken along by Sun Yat-SEN, the term of `Chinese' saw itself officially allotted to Hans as in non Hans of the other ethnos groups: the term of " zhonghua renmin" {中华人民), " populate chinois" , transcending the concept of ethnicity Han, applied then to all the Chinese citizens.

The nationalism of the Chinese State during the years 1920 and 1930 was strongly influenced by the Modernisme and the social Darwinisme; he declared the vocation of the minority ethnicities to being culturally comparable with the group of Hans, “culturally in advance”, to train together the population of the Empire of the Medium. The ideology then was very marked by the situation of the multi-ethnic empires of Occident, like the empire Austro-Hungarian or the Ottoman Empire.

Vis-a-vis the delay accumulated compared to a triumphing Occident and which in a close past had regularly humiliated it, the Empire then sought to clear an alternative way, and, by opposition, better, towards modernity. Thus in 1949 opens a new era for the country, with the advent of the RPC: the official designation of the country takes again the adjective zhonghua renmin , “people Chinese” pluriethnic.

During the following decades, Chinese nationalism will draw its source of influence on the Russian side and its ethnological research. The official line of the RPC became that Chinese Hans were an ethnicity among other, and that each ethnos group, each culture and each language were to be respected. In spite of this official line, the tendencies assimilationnists of Hans remained very strong, and the power struggle due to the demographic weight of Hans in the total population (92%) made that in practice the minorities underwent a strong pressure assimilationnist.

In the years 1960 and 1970, Chinese nationalism mixed with Marxist rhetoric and the nationalist ideological speech was transformed into a rhetoric internationalist.

Chinese nationalism vis-a-vis the Chinese of overseas

Chinese nationalism maintained with the Chinese overseas (alive except territory of China and Taiwan), once again, of the reports/ratios very changing. The Chinese living abroad were enthusiastic supporteurs of the Révolution of 1911.

After the Decolonization, the Chinese overseas were thorough to be identified like citizens of their respective country, rather than attached to the continent, in the logic of integration and assimilation of Chinese nationalism. This policy of the government pushed the Chinese of Singapore and Malaysia to separate the concepts of “Chinese ethnos group” (cultural membership, to which they remained attached) to that from “politically Chinese”, and thus firmly rejected the project of the RPC.

The RPC and the République of China (RC) thus maintained two different policies with respect to the Chinese overseas. The government of the RPC, overseas regarded the Chinese as agents with the pay of the ideology Western Capitaliste, and privileged the maintenance of good relationships with its neighbors of Southeast Asia. The RC, being regarded as the government of widened China (preserving the limits of the Empire at its departure of the continent, the RC, for example, never recognized the independence of the Mongolia, dedicating it in its project with being a Chinese province), and eager, by preoccupations with a legitimacy, to be made allies, courted these Chinese from abroad, ensuring their membership to them the Nation of China.

With the period of reform on which Deng Xiaoping opened the country, as of 1979 the attitude of the PRC towards the Chinese from abroad then radically changed; they were not seen any more like enemy brothers, but like privileged partners, sources of capital and know-how. Many these Chinese then benefitted from their double culture to accompany the Motherland in her integration with the worldwide economy. The country and its people evolving to always more opening, the PRC is then, dice the years 1990, endeavoured to maintain the bond and fidelity towards the Nation of the “new Chinese overseas”, mainly of the students therefore to inform itself abroad, in order to ensure itself, if not their return, their devotion to be worked with the development of the country.

Chinese nationalism and the question of Taiwan

One of the points major of agreement between the various tendencies nationalist in China is fidelity with the policy of “China, only one country”, and thus with the reunification of continental China in the independence island of Taiwan. But when well even the goal of the PRC and the RC, before 1991, converged (unification), the means of reaching that point diverged radically.

After 1991, the position of the RC with respect to the reunification changed semi-officially, towards a position much more ambiguous. There exist two reasons with this reversal; the threat of the government of the PRC to resort to a military action if the “Republic of Taiwan” were declared; but also, more embarrassing, the fact that into its center even, the RC is divided between the nationalists, who support the idea of the reunification, and the supporteurs of the independence of Taiwan, who reject this ambition categorically and defend the freedom of the Taiwanese people with regard to the PRC.

Thus, on the Taiwanese side, the questions of knowing if it is or not necessary to unify in the continent, and if so, how, were put up to now on side, and the various tendencies within the RC agree for the moment to preserve the current location, i.e. the status quo . In spite of this consensus, that each government, on the two sides of the strait agree to find temporarily acceptable, the relations between the Chinese nationalists and the Taiwanese government remain very delicate, points of frictions relating primarily to aspects symbolic systems, such as for example, the name of " Republic of Chine" that allotted the Taiwanese government.

There thus is not urgently with the reunification; Taiwanese side, the basic problem is especially cultural, the population wondering how it must be considered. The supporteurs of the side-blue Coalition find in the Continent a formidable economic and cultural opportunity, pushing Taiwan has to increase its exchanges with continental China, whereas holding them of the side-green Coalition considers that Taiwan is already an independent Nation, and that this independence must precisely be preserved.

Against nationalism and movements of opposition

In addition to the question of the independence of Taiwan, the PRC and its nationalist ideology must face ideological number of currents of opposition inside the continent.

The reproaches towards Chinese nationalism are various and numerous. For some, the ideology of Chinese nationalism would be thus postponed, dictatorial Autoritaire and, and its incompatible application to the governorship of a modern State. For others, this ideology is basically Impérialiste and/or Raciste, and leads in practice to the oppression of the minorities, as that which falls down on the Tibetans and Ouighours.

Chinese populist nationalism

In addition to the assertion in the world economic sphere, years 1990 saw the emergence of a new type of nationalism, said populist. According to the defenders of this theory, this “anti-impérialiste” nationalism, by the opening of the popular consciences on modernity, the post colonialism, the Globalisation… allowed the emergence of a Civil society which is expressed apart from the Political institutions, and in a democratic way.

It however seems that, far from being expressed apart from the political institutions, this nationalism is precisely instrumentalisé by the government of the RPC. Indeed, by opening China with the Liberal play , capitalist, the Chinese Communist party (PCC) took the risk to see the legitimacy of its communist ideology affadir itself, and thus, its popular support. With the manner of the Qing dynasty, being posed guarantor of unicity, the culture and the size of China vis-a-vis an external environment threatening, the RPC handles the nationalist feelings and patriotic of the people in order to guarantee his perenniality.

Deng Xiaoping was the craftsman of the opening of the RPC in the world. It clearly appears in its writings, that whereas it prepares the fastening of HongKong to the continent (and who must be used as example of the model which the PRC plans to propose in Taiwan), socialist opposition however essential PRC/capitalist free port does not have more importance; the principal bond, that which will make the base of the relation between the two countries, is the requirement of Beijing so that the country is controlled by “patriotic ”, “Those which respect their own nation. These are patriots even if they believe in capitalism or feudalism, even with the slave system. We do not ask them to approve the socialist system of China, but only to like the fatherland and to like Hongkong”. Further, he writes: “during more than one century starting from the war of Opium, the foreigners scorned and humiliated the Chinese. The foundation of the Popular republic of China transformed the aspect of China. All the children of the Chinese nation, whatever their costumes or their positions, at least in common have a feeling of national pride” (in States, two systems , extracted the test on the Daily newspaper of the People on line). More none the ideologies antagonist last thus seems to have to supplant patriotism, new pillar of the Chinese unit, and arms with control of the masses of the Party.

Recently, one of the most obvious examples of this Instrumentalisation was permissiveness, completely exceptional in China, of the police force with respect to the Manifestations anti-Japanese women which shook continental China (and South Korea, in protest with the attitude of the government of the Japan vis-a-vis its painful last colonialist), in April 2005. In a spirit good child, nearer to the popular holiday than of the urban revolt, the Chinese of the cities could meet and reinforce their unicity vis-a-vis “the adversity”, before the police force and the army do not disperse the pullers of Japanese publicities mollement. To believe the AsiaTimes.com online news of it, the District committees (civil antennas of the Communist party) would have ensured the hard core of the demonstrations, distributing posters and flags to the demonstrators.

Contemporary nationalism

The end of the Cold war and the opening to the outside world marked the resurgence of stronger nationalist feelings. If patriotism is a tool which makes it possible the PCC to sit its legitimacy, it is not only the fact of people of the party.

Thus, in the current context, the nationalist spirit is also conveyed by Chinese intellectuals, of which some became elements engine about it. Number of educated (sociologists, academics, writers…) were made the cantors of Chinese nationalism. Thus, all the joint authors of the book The Clouded That Can Say No (“China which can say not”), which goes up to the face of the “American imperialism”, are all of the academics, for the majority independent (a journalist freelance , a poet, two journalists…).

See too

Source

(the French article is a translation, with some additions)

Random links: