This goal is hardly unique to Xi Jinping. Indeed, the explicit goal of rejuvenation goes at least as far back as Sun Yet-sen, and has been invoked by almost every modern Chinese leader from Chiang Kai-Shek to Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao. In this way, leaders have used national rejuvenation as a grand goal to mobilize the Chinese population to support the revolution or reforms they launched. In making these efforts, they have helped transform China into the modern and more powerful nation it is today. Far from weakening their resolve, however, China’s impressive new achievements have only strengthened its citizens’ commitment to achieving the Chinese Dream.
It bears noting that the Chinese Dream is in many ways the polar opposite of the more widely understood American Dream. Specifically, whereas the American Dream emphasizes individuals attaining personal enrichment and success, the Chinese Dream is a collective undertaking that calls upon Chinese citizens to make personal sacrifices in order to serve the greater, national good. If there is an appropriate parallel in the U.S. it would not be the American Dream but President John F. Kennedy’s appeal to the American people to “ask not what your country can do for you–ask what you can do for your country.”
Although the meaning of the Chinese Dream is practical and intuitively understood at home, it has the unfortunate consequence of remaining opaque to non-Chinese. Given that the Chinese Dream is deeply rooted in history— in particular on China’s interpretation of history which may differ in crucial ways from Japan or the United States’ own teachings of that history—there is an unavoidable chasm between how China perceives the Chinese Dream and how foreign audiences do. Not only do many non-Chinese lack a strong understanding of Chinese history, but many are not accustomed to drawing such a strong connection between historical events and current affairs.
This varying historical consciousness of different countries creates a perception gap. One need only look at the differences between how Chinese and Japanese students learn important historic events. For example, whereas Chinese students learn all the details about the Sino-Japanese War, Japanese history textbooks contain very little information on the war, so younger generations do not know much about that part of history. Thus, the Chinese and Japanese have contrasting views over the Diaoyu/Senkakus. The Chinese youth are emotional in regard to the territorial dispute because they connect the current standoff with past humiliations, but the Japanese consider these completely separate issues. The Japanese indifference towards historical issues in turn further infuriates the Chinese.
These different historical memories have caused misperceptions between China and some of its neighbors over other sovereignty issues. For example, it seems inconceivable to the Philippines and Vietnam that China’s historical evidence of sovereignty over islands in the South China Sea should take precedent over modern international law. Consequently, these countries and others perceive China’s claims and efforts to defend them as inherently aggressive, and in turn demonstrate that China is a revisionist power.
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Bill Rich
You can talk for days about the last 160 years of why China needs rejuvenation. But to understand the Chinese “dream”, you have to rewind Chinese history way back when China was the top dog. Especially when China dominated the then known-to-China war by beating, killing, evacuating every nationalities around China, during Qing, Tang, Han and earlier dynasties. Count the number of tribes eliminated, literally.
K Ballard
Understanding China and its ambitions could be as simple as translating the characters for it's name more correctly. 中国 could mean middle kingdom, but 'middle' is used in the context of being in-the-middle, really meaning 'central' or center. China, for most of its history has viewed itself as the CENTER Kingdom with the rest of the world on its periphery. Given the leading science, culture, and systems China created for centuries; it is logical that Chinese saw themselves as the center of the world – while the rest of the world was seen as lagging and nothing more than barbarians. Such was their experience for millenia, the last hundred years being an aberration. Restoring their nation to what they historically see as the 'normal status' could be what is upsetting nations which do not want to see China return to the dominant power in the area.
David Lloyd-Jones
K Ballard writes "Understanding China and its ambitions could be as simple as translating the characters for it's name more correctly. 中国 could mean middle kingdom…"
Right. And the sun never set on the British Empire for reasons obvious to anyone who remembers that the other name for the UK is "Great" Britain.
This is wonderful — but can Ballard explain to us how America had a civil war, when the ral name for the country is the "United" States?
Pity that. He had a really great theory gong for a while…
-dlj.
JohnX
Anon wrote: "I want to point out that there are TWO "Anon"s here, one of whom is a rabid Sinophobe. I am unable to change my handle so I will preface my posts with "Anon-Not-Sinophobe".
I believe it has to do with whether you are willing to change it or not, not that you are unable. I was posting as John originally and then John Chan came on and started squealing like a L.B. that John and John Chan could be confused (I couldn't see how as they are two different names). I changed to JohnX as I have larger balls and know that it has less to do with the name and more to do with the message.
John Chan still squeals his propaganda and I post my points. While we disagree on issues, most readers are intelligent enough to realise that JohnX and John Chan are different people. I believed that intelligence is not a name and so I was happy with John originally, but I don't believe in stupid fights so changed it to JohnX.
Therefore, its probably best to make your own name and hold it. Super Anon, Anonyomous, Original Anon are all better choices. Though change once then F**k em, if they are so imbecilic to not be able to understand basic written differences then they are imbecillic enough to not listen too.
Therefore, while I showed the maturity to change a name and not start a Kindergarten fight, I do have cahajones so wont change my name again. Let them suck T.S.O.M.B. A small change is not a big issue. Its not your name that is important, its what you post.
Mark
in Asia there is a lot of talk about rejuvenation in their national discourse, some are even more explicit than China. India, Myanmar, Indonesia and Cambodia are good examples. Take for example, India its flag has the emblem of Ashoka, the 200-300 BC Emperor who ruled much of modern India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. The flag of Indonesia is based on the flag on Hindu Empire Majapahit, their national emblem/moto also taken from their Hindu//Buddhist past. The symbol on the flag of Cambodia is that of Ankor Wat. The CPC is rather late, but what happens if all of Asia acted on its rejuvenation desires. Does India have less rights to say Pakistan, Bangladesh Or Indonesia has rights to Malaysia, because most Malays in Malaysia are descendent of people originally from Indonesia.
The author in his book present a much better analysis. Here is a book review by FT.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/634a39ec-e888-11e1-8ffc-00144feab49a.html#axzz2KGP9uYxs
"As Dr Zheng makes clear, the adoption of an explicitly nationalist discourse is a relatively recent development for the Chinese Communist party. It was the nationalist Kuomintang, led by Chiang, that was initially fixated by the idea of avenging the depredations of imperialists and the “unfair treaties” they imposed on China. The Communist party, which was wedded to a class-based view of history and prided itself on its internationalism, did not stress nationalism. Politically, it was more convenient for the communists to blame the misfortunes of China during the 19th and 20th centuries on the decadence and weakness of the country’s own rulers.
That all changed, however, in the post-Mao era. Once the Communist party had effectively embraced capitalism, inequality and globalization, it needed some new source of political legitimacy. This search for a new political narrative became much more urgent after the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989."
What is interesting, is the author didn't mention Mao Zedong as the great exception in the rejuvenation discourse. When the CPC came to power in 1949, their aim was to build a "New China", to build a "Chinese" people. This gave impetus to the Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward. I don't think Mao was talking about rejuvenation, but a completely New China. To Mao, much of China's past was bad, there was no need for rejuvenation, but something totally new.
Western commentators point to the CPC hiding Mao's fault's, the Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward, but its these two events are not that important in this rejuvenation debate. The historical amnesia goes back much further, — the Manchu invasion of 1644. There is rarely any mention about the tens of millions killed during the Manchu Invasion, the economic destruction inflicted on China's most productive region the Yangtze River Delta, the numerous rebellions the Qing Dynasty had to overcome, system of apartheid between Han/Manchus. I don't buy the argument that the Manchus were similar to previous invaders. They were different. Their segregation policies kept them distinct far longer than it otherwise would. One example of this amnesia is the Taiping Rebellion. This was China's first total war, the most devastating war of the 19th century, but it gets less mention than the Opium Wars. The average Chinese high school student could not name even 2 battles that happened during the Taiping Rebellion. It effected China on so many levels, yet in China and introductory history on Modern Chinese history in Western universities its skimmed over. Does the Taiping Rebellion deserve at least equal footing as the Opium War? Its the equivalent of the US putting more emphasis on the War of 1812 than the Civil War, because the White House was torched by the evil Canadians,
The author at times can get carried away from his own biases.
"For example, whereas Chinese students learn all the details about the Sino-Japanese War, Japanese history textbooks contain very little information on the war, so younger generations do not know much about that part of history"
The Chinese in the PRC don't study all aspects of the Sino-Japanese War. in most high schools in the PRC, only battles in which the CPC was involved in are covered, which was limited to the years 1937-1940. The battles which the KMT was the sole participant against the Japanese are not covered in any detail in the PRC, and there are dozens upon of major engagements where the KMT fought Ma Ying Jeou, the President of ROC. said to this day, the CPC does not admit that the KMT did most of the fighting against the Japanese. Most educated Chinese in the PRC learn about the KMT role in the Sino-Japanese War through the internet.
Observer
For those chines posters that brag about how great china is, read this. Poor chinese live in cages, just like animals.
(Moderators, this is not spam) = http://news.yahoo.com/poor-cages-show-dark-side-142611366.html
Funny how chinese such as John Chan, liangli01, and others "forgot" to tell us the whole story.
papa john
They might live in a cave themselves. They don't have a courage of "chinese characteristic" to tell.
Nguyen
"Without the US defeating imperial Japan I’m sure china today would be a Japanese speaking province!"
Without a doubt, true.
ACT
except that the Soviet Union would have turned right around, invaded Japan and turned it into a sino-russian satellite state, albeit after violently purging anyone who had anything to do with the warcrimes that the japanese government comitted; that, and the whole of korea would be under the rule of the kim dynasty.
Samurai X
Proud citizens of the “Middle Kingdom” (as the author wrote) won’t let their factories keep pumping poisons to air and rivers, sewerage left broken, companies ignoring copyrights and patents, and CCP leaders stealing tax money to abroad. Many poor Chinese migrate too, to countries like USA, Canada and Japan only to take advantages of better welfares we offer, and end up picking up cans from streets, making long lines to free giveaways, and stealing neighbor’s dogs. Stop humiliating yourself, and spend some budgets for environmental conservation and welfares instead of building up unnecessary military. There will be no Chinese Dream unless CCP falls and fully democratized.
Kim’s Uncle
It’s kinda funny these Chinese commies hold the US as the ring leader of the 19th century West! What warped little minds they have. The US did not become a world power until the 20th century! Hello? If you chi-coms have problem with Britain which humiliated you in 2 Opium Wars then blame it on Britain!. Same goes with France and Japan! It’s not our fault Chinese want to be stupid and isolated! Your leaders did that! Your soldiers fought wars wearing Kung fu outfits! LOL. It’s not our fault Chinese did not want to industrialize! Anyway the US sent the Flying Tigers to fight the Japanese! What the hell did you commies do? Without the US defeating imperial Japan I’m sure china today would be a Japanese speaking province!
nirvana
Correct. It is a very confused and mixed-up history that the Chinese are told to remember.
Bill Rich
What does facts and truth have anything to do with Chinese understanding of history ? It is political expedience that matters.