5
The Rapid Ascension of China in the 21st Century. Right, Righteous or 'Just Plain Wrong'?
7 years agoNearly everyone in the world has tasted delicious Chinese food, seen enchanting Chinese Characters or met friendly Chinese people in their daily lives. Yet, what does it mean to be 'Chinese?'
One of the most recognizable features of Chinese culture is architecture, art and a unique language, however, according to my experience, those features are only a tip of the iceberg.
The concept of something having 'Chinese' characteristics is nothing new to Western society, as explorers and ambassadors of many ages have brought back great tales of wealthy cities, powerful Leaders and charismatic Ladies. (Ever heard of the "Book of the Marvels of the World?")
However, to accurately describe what is or is not 'Chinese' is a difficult task in and of itself, consuming certain people for the entirety of their lives as they attempt to define what it means to be 'Chinese.' There's even a word in the English language to describe people who are very interested in China - as 'Sinophiles.'
People from mainland China are extraordinarily curious and generally have a fascination with everything 'foreign' - interpreting 'foreign things' as having innately better qualities than 'Chinese things.' I guess you could call them 'Westophiles.'
I believe this to be a habit of looking through a 'looking-glass' and seeing minute details of a culture magnified into scenes of exotic beauty and charm.
As China steadily progresses into being the world's greatest economic powers, other countries become increasingly aware of the growing strength of Chinese economic power, and as such, tend to want to work with China over traditional trading partners such as Europe and the Americas.
If one just looks at the infrastructure and development progress within the past 30-50 years, one can see that China has far surpassed any comparable nation in the same time frame.
The sheer magnitude of the undertaking within China to become a world-power is astonishing to say the least - which gives a false impression that China has 'burst onto the scene of the 21st century.' To witness the physical development of China and the lengths to which the Chinese government is willing to go to provide for the Chinese nation is to see optimism at its greatest and pragmatism in full practice.
Every 'fastball' thrown at China has been 'hit out of the park,' so to speak.
The question remains as to whether China as a nation will develop into a force of stabilization in the world or develop inherently destructive tendencies. (Some would argue that China has both tendencies)
Of course, there is significant room for debate on this matter and I do not speak for the Chinese government in any way. It likely depends on which perspective you hold - as a 'liberator' or as 'the liberated.'
For example, most of the Tibetans that I have met seem to extol the religious virtues of Tibetan society while also simultaneously enjoying the rights of being Chinese citizens.
So, there is no consensus on the matter, I just bring it up as a point and counter-point to what it means to be Chinese. (Tibetans as a nation don't self-identify as Chinese, although I've met a few that do consider themselves to be Chinese.)
Of course, I would love some comments on this topic!
1. So, the point I'm getting at is, "What is China?"
2. Is China a nationality, ethnicity or a national concept?
3. In your view, is China a 'dream fulfilled' or 'a glass half-empty'? (or something else entirely)
4. Do you see China an occupier, liberator or 'force to be reckoned with'?
5. Do you feel that China is a potential ally, stalwart friend or traditional enemy?
If you can relate some of your knowledge and experience on the matter, it would be much appreciated, however much or little.
As always, please keep your comments polite and in line with Verbling policy. Any inappropriate or disrespectful comments will be immediately removed from discussion and reported to Verbling for further action.
Thank you!
Login to comment.
Comments (2)
China is a country. We know this because it satisfies several criteria such as the government having a monopoly on violence, and its status as a country is recognized by most other countries. The lines on the map can, however, wax and wane. The precise shape that China takes is subject to complicated geopolitical forces.
The Chinese people are a nation, or nationality. A nation is something that one is born into, see the Latin root: nat - 'born'.
Chinese ethnic taxonomy is a messy business, but basically the Chinese people are the Han. The Chinese Communist Party's official line is that there are 55 ethnic minority groups in China... bu most of those minority groups are essentially made up. They are only different from the Han on a superficial level. The few remaining minority groups, who are actually significantly different from the Han (I.E. the Tibetans and the Uyghurs), largely exist on the periphery of Chinese society.
Interesting point of view on the monopolization of violence by the state. No doubt that the government of China has full control of China by a variety of means.
I definitely disagree that the ethnic minority groups in China are a modern fabrication, as that would ignore the facts of history and also the facts on the ground.
Yunnan province is home to 24 different nationalities of China. They have significant ethnic, cultural and genetic diversity. They have separate languages that are not mutually intelligible, but share roots with the Chinese language and not with Tibetan or Indo-European languages.
And, I also disagree that Tibetans and Uyghurs exist only on the periphery of Chinese society. The traditional homelands of these ethnic groups definitely exist near border regions of China, however, one can find both Tibetan Buddhist and Uyghur Muslims in every province of China and especially in large cities where they engage in various levels and forms of commerce.
And, one of the legacies of Imperial dynasties of China is the HuKou system which registers individuals based on their familial ties, especially in regards to their relations to a specific, male head-of-household.
In addition, ethnically Han men who have children with wives from a minority ethnic group confer Han nationality unto their children. This leads to a higher number of people who self-report their nationality to be Han Chinese, up to 95% in some cases.
The Han nationality is a veneer over a genetically diverse population of ethnic minorities. It is over-simplistic to say that Chinese people are 'basically Han.'
I appreciate your comment! Thank you for stimulating the debate!
Are you familiar with the history of ethnic classification in China? If not, here is a good book to start with: https://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520272743
A brief summary:
Upon conducting its first ever national census, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) discovered that they had, apparently, over 400 ethnic minorities living within their borders. They ended up with the number 55 by combining these minority groups together based off of linguistic similarity. Genetic and cultural factors had little influence in forming these groups. For example, they took over twenty minority groups, clumped them together, and formed what is now known as the Yi minority group. This is what I meant by saying these minority groups are made up; the Yi exists because the CCP said so.
If you can find me a Uyghur or Tibetan who is the head of a state owned enterprise or a member of the standing committee, then I will retract my comment on them existing on the periphery of society.
And finally, the comment about having a monopoly on violence is not my point of view. It is a core concept in international law, and it is a defining characteristic on what it means to be a sovereign state.
If you imagine the UK as a foreigner, then you'd likely see it as a mostly homogeneous group of people living on the same island (except Northern Ireland).
A citizen of the UK would likely identify based on which city they grew up in and their socio-economic background.
People in the same city might further refine themselves by which side of the city they lived on and which schools they attended.
The definition of what it means to be Chinese can vary based on a lot of factors, which was the original point of my post.
When I'm in China, ordinary people think I'm from Xin Jiang province because I have sandy-colored hair, green eyes and Caucasian features. On top of it, I have an accent of Mandarin that sounds like Turkic, though I'm from Virginia in the United States.
Ethnically, I'm mixed race. I have Native American, African American and Northern European ancestry. However, I have a strong Southern accent and am traditionally conservative.
We're all defined by our race, ethnicity, ethnic background, place of origin, language, accent, philosophy, personality and so on. We also self-identify in various ways and it may or may not be strictly factual.
I think,the 5000 long history and the nature of the feudal dynasties has a deep-rooted affection on the mindset of chinese people ，the diversity of chinese culture and food is determined by 56 minorities(many dissappeared and some be protected) and geographic factors . nowdays，people seldom talk about Tibet issues,we talk about travelling there a lot.since the reform and opening-up of the world market,the curiosity and openness of chinese people was triggered,dazzleed by foreign products，like a period of ambiguity，these days，people are becoming more and more rational on consuming.chinese arts and ancient civilization（国学） are booming again,to some extent,we may say political directed event to protect our own culture generated by ancestors，a typical phenomenon，parents crazily sent children to various art training center.there is a nature rule world wide that everything ends up a circle and has its own balance.I think balance(or you can say netrual（中庸）,that's also a ingrained ancient concept,not occupier,not liberator) is a proper word to describe a lot of things in china.过犹不及，right？
I appreciate your comment on this topic!
I like your idea about balance and neutrality. The concept of rationality or 'the mean to an end' is central to Chinese philosophy.
Like you said, China has 5000 years of literal history and, according to archaeology, a very defined root culture of more than 20,000 years.
The vast majority of social scientists imagine time linearly because such thinking easily translates into timelines, charts and graphs, however, I see culture as resembling a Banyan tree.
I learned this example studying from Brahmans in India.
They describe the Banyan tree as a uprooted tree swept away by the tide to a new shoreline. There it takes root in the nutritious soil, turning into a 'mother' tree.
The mother will first grow upwards towards the light until the wind breaks its heavy branches. Rather than dying, the broken branches will grow downward into the soil, stabilizing the tree and allowing the mother tree to grow even taller, absorbing more sunlight as it grows taller and wider in the process.
As the tree grows to a maximum height and width, the roots will grow deeper and deeper until new 'mother' trees sprout in a defined radius around the original mother.
As the new 'mothers' grow, they fortify the original mother against the wind and storm.
The process repeats until a great forest of Banyan trees arise from the soil.
A single Banyan tree can take more than 200-300 years to mature into a giant 'mother' tree. A Banyan forest can take over 10,000 years to grow into an old-growth forest.
All great cultures grow laterally as well as expansively.
China is a perfect illustration of this example.
Hi Zhijuan Liu, I enjoyed your input here, as well as your writing style. The truth is, even though new technologies allow now for instant communication, China as well as many countries in the far East (from Europe) still have an aura of fascinating, exotic and far away cultures.
Hi,Jackie,thank you for your enjoyment,I agree with you, technologies facilitate communication nowdays and the process of globalization is nodoubt a trend.though the multi-culture integration is taking place everyday,something still retained.
