Articles and Resources
Author: Richard L. Wilson
Keywords: China, China and Inner Asia, International Relations, Political Science, World History
How to Cite: L. Wilson, R. (2012) “China's Rise in Historical Perspective”, Education About Asia. 17(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.65959/eaa.1110
Evelyn S. Rawski provided the more distant historical information on China’s security issues and strategy, while Michael D. Swaine provided an account of these issues in the post-Cold War period. Dwight H. Perkins offered a global perspective on China’s pre-reform economy, and then Barry Naughton ad- dressed the dynamics of China’s current reform-era economy. Environmental issues were addressed under the heading of “Ecological and Resource Inter- action.” Mark Elvin looked at the history of the environmental impasse of the latter days of the Imperial period, while Erica S. Downs discussed contemporary issues in China’s current energy rise. Political and governmental issues were discussed under the heading of “Political Creativity and Political Development.” R. Keith Schoppa offered the more historical view, and Joseph Fewsmith provided the contemporary analysis. Each of these paired essays deserves greater attention to give each full credit, but space does not permit a more detailed examination. The five paired essays culminate in a superb essay by Qin Yaqing.
Collectively, these eleven essays focus research and scholar- ship on at least one area that needs additional attention. Qin Yaqing does not mention Confucianism except in a few references that directly or indirectly suggest it was abandoned a century ago. He examines China’s political psychology without directly men- tioning that the current Chinese system is still Confucian at its core, albeit with the transformations that occurred in the belief system between the fifth century BCE and the present.
Even though Qin Yaqing barely mentions Confucius, evolved Confucian-centered Chinese traditional thinking abounds in his essay. More than once, he refers to China’s 5,000-year, continuous cultural history, but he can only refer to 5,000-year, continuous cultural history if he makes Confucian assumptions. Confucius said the ideas he espoused were not really his own but were distilled from China’s ancient past. This past was already ancient when Confucius wrote about it 2,500 years ago.
Qin Yaqing cites Hu Jintao’s proposal at the 2005 UN Summit to “Strive to build a harmonious world with long peace and common prosperity.” This sounds quaint to Western ears, but it is fully understandable as a twenty-first century restatement of Confucian relationships applied internationally. Qin Yaqing correctly asserts that China does not intend to recreate the old “tribute” system in which Chinese “vassals” gave gifts to the Chinese emperor, and he gave gifts of greater value in return. The “tribute” system of international trade—such as it was—is clearly dated, but it is possible that some current Chinese practices could be traced to it. China has undervalued its currency, thereby giving their trading partners more in value than they receive in return. This could be justified as stimulating economic activity for everyone (using the Keynesian logic that justified the US Marshall Plan for postwar Europe). Still, is it possible that, subconsciously, the Chinese find this policy agreeable because it resembles a Chinese idea of a tribute system?
For the past six decades, Beijing’s Tiananmen Square has been a shrine to the icons of Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong thought. Those who purveyed this worldview were unapologetically anti-Confucian. Yet a careful examination of the Maoist period revealed a great deal of Confucianism. This reviewer must be included among those who struggled to find much Karl Marx in Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong thought, but never had any trouble finding evidence of Confucius. It is therefore refreshingly honest that the government of the People’s Republic has erected a statue of Confucius in Tiananmen Square alongside his Maoist critics.
That the new statue is of Confucius, and not of a Westerner such as Milton Friedman, may tell us something. Perhaps future Chinese studies should move in the direction of considering whether evolved, Confucian-centered Chinese traditional thought is also a factor in China’s rise to greatness. Chinese traditional thought has always recognized the importance, if not the inevitability, of dynastic cycles. Perhaps it would be more accurate to talk about evolved, Confucian- centered Chinese traditional thought as a cause of China’s return to greatness.