The Chinese view their history in terms of dynasties. Periods with a strong central government are referred to as "Golden Ages," while those eras where China was decentralized are considered dark ages. With the fall of the Qing Dynasty, generally given the date of 1911, until the Communist Party's victory over the Nationalists, two warring factions prevented a strong central government from functioning.
Accepting a strong central government does not come naturally to China. It is a large landmass with many diverse groups of people. There are several different languages spoken in the country. I like to make the joke that China has about a billion different dialects. From city to city, you feel like you're in a different country with each stop. None of this is a new phenomenon. If anything, China is slowly becoming more homogenous.
The Qing Dynasty, ruled by a minority ethnic group- the Manchus- had to preserve its culture while at the same time appeasing the dominant ethnic group within China, the Han. The Qing did so by rooting their legitimacy in orthodox Confucianism and rarely imposing Manchu cultural aspects on the wider population of the empire. They kept their culture alive by maintaining the Manchu language and using it to supplement governmental declarations. However, the only cultural aspect that the Manchus imposed was the queue hairstyle. Otherwise, they kept in place some fundamental aspects of Han culture. In addition to the Confucian value of filial piety, the Manchus also kept such ancient institutions as the civil service exam system.
Thus maintaining their distinctness and yet not imposing their culture was a shrewd political tactic and a means of gaining legitimacy in the eyes of the Han. Today, the CCP has a similar task in seeking legitimacy in order to keep all of China within their realm. The CCP's legitimacy rests on the ideology of socialism. They have worked to convince the population to serve the state. Everything one does should be for the betterment of the state. If the Party allowed democracy to flourish, their principle for legitimacy would likely be undermined, which may result in a massive breakup of China.
That is not to place judgment in either direction on the actions of the CCP, but merely to put them into perspective. The Olympics brought people from all over the world to Beijing. It is plausible that the result was an exchange of ideas. Perhaps this exchange will plant a seed of dissent and create an active movement to challenge the government's limitations on free speech in China. But it is important to realize that an unrestricted freedom of speech might very well divide China into lands based on ethnic groups. Whether or not the realization of self-determination among these various groups will have a positive effect for their people is a question for another time.
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Showing posts with label China. Show all posts
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Boycott the Beijing Olympics?
The talk to boycott the 2008 Summer Olympics in China has heated up lately. The logic that calls for the boycott is embarrassingly elementary. It boils down to: China commits human rights violations so we should boycott the Olympics in their country to show our outrage at their abuses.
The protesters don't seem to understand the implications of their call to boycott. There have been protests of the Olympic torch running in France, Germany, and the United States. While France and Germany are guilty of human rights violations, I am from the United States, so I will speak to the protesters from my country.
The Chinese government is surely guilty of violating the human rights of not only its citizens, but those from other nations. However, so has the United States. We've ruined Iraq's society; we've killed numerous Afghan citizens. We dethrone the leaders of other countries as if it's our right. We've detained countless individuals without providing them with their due rights. The United States of America has violated the human rights of people all over the world. Yet, there were no protests before the 1996 Atlanta Olympics or the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics. We must take care of our own house first, before we protest the actions of others.
Freeing Tibet has been the fad cause of the West for a while now. I oppose the culture destruction of the Han Chinese against the Tibetans. But understand what you are saying when you call for Tibet's independence. Other regions will declare their independence based on ethnic lines. You are saying that a non-Western country cannot be multi-ethnic. There is an implicit racism in this belief. "They" are not capable of getting along with other ethnicities.
The other implication of the break up of China is to cut the power from this large and most populous nation. The West wants to hold on to it's power and China is threatening. If China is cut into pieces, they are no longer a threat. That's why the Dalai Lama has always approved covert CIA action to resist the Chinese government on behalf of Tibet. I admire the Dalai Lama, but this is not a discussion of Good versus Evil. The Dalai Lama has blood on his hands too.
The Western powers don't want China to have Western privileges like hosting the Olympics. Hosting the Olympics is a symbol that China is the new power-broker on the block and that scares the West. I am surprised that liberal activists are working to maintain the status quo of Western power. Instead, they should fight to right the wrongs in their own countries and celebrate the fact that a non-white-dominated country will host the summer Olympics for the first time since 1988 and only the second since 1968.
The protesters don't seem to understand the implications of their call to boycott. There have been protests of the Olympic torch running in France, Germany, and the United States. While France and Germany are guilty of human rights violations, I am from the United States, so I will speak to the protesters from my country.
The Chinese government is surely guilty of violating the human rights of not only its citizens, but those from other nations. However, so has the United States. We've ruined Iraq's society; we've killed numerous Afghan citizens. We dethrone the leaders of other countries as if it's our right. We've detained countless individuals without providing them with their due rights. The United States of America has violated the human rights of people all over the world. Yet, there were no protests before the 1996 Atlanta Olympics or the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics. We must take care of our own house first, before we protest the actions of others.
Freeing Tibet has been the fad cause of the West for a while now. I oppose the culture destruction of the Han Chinese against the Tibetans. But understand what you are saying when you call for Tibet's independence. Other regions will declare their independence based on ethnic lines. You are saying that a non-Western country cannot be multi-ethnic. There is an implicit racism in this belief. "They" are not capable of getting along with other ethnicities.
The other implication of the break up of China is to cut the power from this large and most populous nation. The West wants to hold on to it's power and China is threatening. If China is cut into pieces, they are no longer a threat. That's why the Dalai Lama has always approved covert CIA action to resist the Chinese government on behalf of Tibet. I admire the Dalai Lama, but this is not a discussion of Good versus Evil. The Dalai Lama has blood on his hands too.
The Western powers don't want China to have Western privileges like hosting the Olympics. Hosting the Olympics is a symbol that China is the new power-broker on the block and that scares the West. I am surprised that liberal activists are working to maintain the status quo of Western power. Instead, they should fight to right the wrongs in their own countries and celebrate the fact that a non-white-dominated country will host the summer Olympics for the first time since 1988 and only the second since 1968.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)