Is This An Overview?
Ancient Chinese architecture might not have survived the
ravages of time, but the way of ruling, thinking and behaving has endured. Chinese traditions did not end with a fall of
a government. The traditions were
rebuilt by forthcoming governments. The
methods were flexible, and could be adapted to by supporting or opposing
them. The autocratic elements of the
traditions were used by the Chinese Communist Party for social engineering
purposes.
Rather than a religion, Chinese ethics philosophy of
Confucianism was used to coordinate people’s behavior. A malleable system that enabled its various
interpretations throughout Chinese history, that provided an understanding on
how to treat others. Deference was
needed for superiors. Chinese sense of
superiority was evident by foreign governments throughout history, which
created a variety of misinterpretations from each perspective. China was portrayed as virtuous, no matter
their actions. That China’s
interventions in other regions were for the benefit of the others, to civilize
the barbarians.
China uses history as a weapon by disregarding unfavorable
events, and changing events to favor Chinese views. During the 20th century, China turned away
from Dynasty and monarchy, but the methods were similar. The government only accepted as true what
they wanted to, and blamed others for that which could not be denied. Using philosophy that enabled people’s
deference to society over their own interests.
Inventing new methods to deal with problem, using prior methods
differently, and applying foreign ideas in their own way.
How Does China’s Philosophy Effect Behavior?
Confucianism is an ethic, rather than a religion. Confucianism had mixed qualities, but what
Confucianism did was provide an ethics that brought government and people
together. The ethics coordinated
behavior. Confucianism was malleable and
could represent different ideas to different people and contexts. Confucian
claims of virtue could be misused and favor the individual who does the action.
Heaven was favorable to people, but had imperatives. To have virtue, humans need to be filial,
respectful, and obedient. Confucius and
Mencius logical systems overlapped with religious views and law-and-order
Legalism. Ordinary Chinese carefully
paid deference to the Gods, emperor, and their immediate superiors.
Confucianism was made possible by government enforcement,
through Legalism and institutions of governance. A legal framework that could use physical
force. Emperor had a practical interest
in statecraft, rather than the supernatural.
How Does China Think About Others?
China has an enduring us-and-them system, a distinction
between Chinese and Barbarian. That
China is the civilizing force and natural rulers of barbarians who are a lesser
breed. That the barbarians should be
grateful to be influenced by China.
These views create a tendency to overlook what China learned from other
people. Foreign agents that interacted
with the Chinese court, commented on Chinese sense of superiority.
The emperor was the representative of Heaven and Earth. Giving justifications and virtue to any
decisions made by the emperor. When
China attacked neighboring states, or governments who sought independence,
China maintained a claim of virtue for their actions. That their actions were justified and meant
for the betterment of the people they were intervening in, to rid them of an
oppressive regime. Attacking a neighbor
was a favor to lesser people, as that enabled Heaven to reestablished a proper
order. Chinese like to pretend that barbarians
have accepted China’s reign of virtue rather than admit how regularly China had
to use force against barbarians.
Given their superiority attitude, China has a history of
making political gifts given to them, be seen as tribute. In this way, the supposed gifting party
appears to have submitted to China, and China accepted them as a vassal. These views caused conflict. What is rarely referenced are the times that
China had given gifts and tribute to others.
China has a large Han majority who do not have much
territory. With minority nationalities
who have the vast territory and resources.
How Is History Turned Into Politics?
For China, history is a political tool. Changing and interpreting what happened to
fit political goals. Even archaeology is
a political project. Myths about history
are used as political weapons.
Chinese history does reference events in which China was not
the superior force. Does not reference
when China could not get its way. Does
not reference when others did not accept Chinese ways with China not being able
to do anything about the situation. This
occurred when negotiating with semi-equal forces.
One China has become the ideology,
but Mao thought that China was to be divided into 27 countries. China believes that any territory that has
come into contact with China, has become part of China and is part of China’s
history. While other states that lost
territory do not dispute the loss of the territory, China does dispute their
prior losses. Even the territories that
were part of the conquerors of China are considered to be Chinese history and
territory.
What Was The Succession Plan?
Emperors had a succession problem as they needed to
designate a child, but they had many children.
Conflict and power struggles threatened the stability of the
polity. Gaining power through murder was
common in ancient China and in the Communist Party. Legitimacy and succession are perpetual
problems.
What Was China’s 20th Century Experience?
After the collapse of the monarchy, China has been trying to
reconcile the methods of monarchy and fitting into the different political
understandings. They have kept much the
same, while the changes have not made them into an effective state that manages
the different social expectations of the era.
Unlike a democratic state whose political system is shaped and reshaped
continuously by the citizens decisions.
China’s imperial components remain even if the imperial structure was
removed. China still relies on imperial
repression and myths to hold together the diverse cultures.
During the early 20th century, when the Qing
Dynasty was failing, many provinces declared independence. Their reasons for independence were diverse,
but they could not apply different political systems than those already used. The revolutionaries had immediate success,
but could not provide a constructive agenda afterwards.
Mao wanted China to be neutral to foreign governments. But the Chinese Communist Party saw central
power as a tool for China’s advancement.
Provincial autonomy and federalism were dismissed. The feudalism that emerged after Qing
Dynasty, was party new and partly a continuation. New western tools such as the railroad, were
used as methods of power to control the kingdom. Bolshevism offered China a way to be
progressive and anti-Western, while also provide quick solutions to Western
influence on China.
One party state meant that no alternative political parties
were allowed, no elections, or free press.
A system akin to an emperor, authoritarian, political tutor. CCP’s reach was greater than prior governance
structures. CCP branches existed in
every county. A surveillance network
meant to foster benevolent paternalism and work. The party controlled communication and what
everyone was able to do. Socialism was
omnipresent, with class categories separating various peoples, and how the
individual was meant to subordinate to the collective purpose. Truth was what the CCP wanted truth to
be. There needed to be unfailing loyalty
in the leader, who was infallible and needed to be constantly studied. Death was an accepted means of punishment to
maintain the collective morality.
Mao recognized that very little information came to
Mao. Mao chose what to hear which were
only favorable information about the Great Leap. Information that could not be denied, Mao
blamed the problems on scapegoats which were class enemies. Mao could not accept socialism as a flawed
political system, therefore did not accept outcomes that indicated the flaws.
Ideology began to be reduced during Deng’s changes, but that
did not allow for plurality of ideologies.
There was no individual independence, nor was criticizing China an
option. People were trusted with their
money, but not their minds. What was
allowed was what the Communist Party found acceptable. Publishers were shut down for politically incorrect
viewpoints.
China is oppressive and afraid of its own people. Freedoms have been experimented with, giving
some freedoms to people, but the government has generally opted for repression
when disorder was a perceived threat.
The legal system remained harsh and was attached to the wants of the
political party rather than justice and proportioned appropriate
punishment. The state depends on
confessions, false confessions, to justify the system.
Marketization under Deng enabled private firms, and joint
ventures between the foreign and local capital.
The private business and joint ventures crowded out state
factories. State factories began to
produce less share of the market, and they were mainly losing money. Banks were closely attached to the government
that lead to the subsidization of state factories, which made profit and loss
meaningless. China’s socialism is
enduring, transforming into market socialism rather than becoming capitalistic.
Caveats?
The focus of the book is on China
during the 20th century. There
is a lot of information on China’s history before that era, but that
information is sporadic and is used to provide evidence for a claim. The reader would need to research more
Chinese history for a better understanding of the events.
The struggle between a changing and changeless China is part
of the myth structure that the author describes, disagreeing with, but applies
as a theme in the book. The problem is
that appearances of similarity, does not represent similarity in anything but
appearance. There were ideas and methods
that appear to be a theme, but what makes them similar is their association
with China rather than the core claims being consistent. The ideas and methods were influential, but
as the author recognizes, they have been misused and reinterpreted.
The author expresses Chinas flexibility and creativity, and
criticism when considering China as perpetually stagnant, changeless, and
isolated, as those views were formed by the end of the Qing Dynasty which had
become rigid. But throughout the book
the author considers various themes in China to have been reused, used
differently, but still considered consistent even if much has changed. Alternatively, the author provides the
impression that other states have more completely changed their political systems. Other states also have used their historic
methods to legitimize their own political structures through support or
disagreement with the prior methods.
Just as Chinese governments had chosen how to use their historic methods
to legitimize their rule.
