A book on China by Martin Jacques, who feels that China will one day, rule the world.
He sets forth his arguments nicely and thereafter tries to speculate as to how the world will look like - ‘When’ China rules the world.
So will it? It’s a big ‘Maybe’, I think.
Some commentators like Nitin Pai (@acorn on twitter) do not think so. In his ‘Business Standard’ column Nitin says the title should have been “if’ and not ‘When’.
China is a freak of nature.
Else how is it that a nation, the size of a continent, can have so much of puke-worthy uniformity?
How is it that 90% of its citizens call themselves ‘Han Chinese’ and speak the same language?
How do you get 1.2 billion people to think alike?
Like I said, China is a freak of nature. Nowhere in the world will you find conformity of culture in such a large scale. Look at India or Europe and you will know what I mean.
And the secret behind this puke-worthy conformity?
It’s geography. I think. At least partially.
Terrain friction does not permit an easy land route to China, unlike India.
To the South and South West you have the Himalayas;
To the East and South East you have the South China Sea;
To the North and North West, you have the Steppe’s and Gobi Desert.
So folks in China were left in relative isolation to develop their culture and traditions in peace till the 19th century .
The Mongols and Manchus who were the only invaders got sinicized in due course.
In contrast, look at India.
We had friendly neighborhood migrations/invasions throughout our known history.
Nobody’s got a clue as to who the Indus Valley folks were. Dravidians are also migrants. So are the Aryans. Then came the Persians, Greeks, Mohammedans and finally of course the ‘White man’.
We have had a ‘cultural shock treatment’ every other century. Never been left alone. Hence in India we have a mash up of everything.
Not so in China. Such uniformity is rare.
So will China rule the world?
The Chinese say “ Who can stop me?”
As a race who believe in their inherent superiority over other ‘barbarians’ of the world, they think it is just a matter of time.
With a 5000 year history, blessed with oodles of patience, Chinese are waiting in the wings.
Deng’s comment brings out their world view:
‘Observe developments soberly, maintain our position, meet challenges calmly, hide our capacities and bide our time, remain free of ambition, never claim leadership.’
Chinese conceptions of time are also slightly different. Note former Chinese premier Zhou En Lai’s reported response to Henry Kissinger’s question in 1972 about the consequences of the French Revolution: ‘It is too early to say.’
What if they do rule the world? Should it be a cause of concern?
Some of the Chinese attitudes can be considered to be a ‘grey’ area.
Handling of ethnic minorities by Chinese is a big negative. Treatment of Tibetans and Uighurs of Xingjiang is well documented.
Oft-repeated process of Han settlement in these areas have changed the ethnic balance.
In Xingjiang, Hans are about 50% now, compared with 6 per cent in a 1950s census. A similar process is on in Tibet also.
Root problem is the ingrained sense of racial superiority of Chinese.
Sun Yat Sen of 1911 Revolution fame, amplifies the Chinese racial worldview:
“Mankind is divided into five races. The yellow and white races are relatively strong and intelligent. Because the other races are feeble and stupid, they are being exterminated by the white race. Only the yellow race competes with the white race. This is so-called evolution …. Among the contemporary races that could be called superior, there are only the yellow and white races. China belongs to the yellow races.”
Tibetans, to Chinese, are seen as backward and primitive, and should be grateful to Chinese for bringing them civilization and development.
Zhang Qingli, Communist Party secretary of the Tibet, confirms the ‘benevolent’ role of Chinese:
‘The Communist Party is like the parent to the Tibetan people, and it is always considerate about what the children need …. The central party committee is the real Buddha for Tibetans.’
Yuan Qinghai, a Lhasa taxi driver: ‘We don’t have a good impression of them, as they are lazy and they hate us. In their mind taking a bath once or twice in their life is sacred, but to a Han it is filthy and unacceptable.’
Lack of Democracy and a vibrant free press in China is of course another big negative.
So will China change once they get to rule the world? Or will they also mouth pious platitudes like US about freedom and democracy, while carrying on doing what they want with the world?
There are however huge positives also.
In his cult song ‘ Imagine’, John Lennon crooned:
“Imagine there’s no country, and no religion too”
China, being the freak that it is, is the one country in the world where religion is almost a non-issue.
Folks there do have some form of ancestral worship, but it is strictly a private affair.
Imagine such a world!
Where religion is actually a non-issue.
Where religion is relegated to its rightful place in society, i.e confined to one’s four walls, something private and personal.
A world where no one cares about what kind of faith you practice at home.
For this reason alone, I fervently wish China does get to rule the world and tell those religious hate mongers to lump it and just shut up.
In China today people are simply left free to get on with the business of transforming their living standards.
Folks do not talk of politics or religion. They have retreated into a private world of consumption.
Money-making, is the most valued and respected form of social activity.
Is that such a bad thing? I think not. I think it’s perfect.
With just over 20 million plus folks below poverty line, of a population of 1.2 Billion, I think the Chinese have got their priorities right.
And to think that in 1978 they had close to 300 million under poverty line.
Another aspect is the importance given to Confucian precept of filial piety and the central role of family, in contrast to ‘Individualism’ propagated by Western Societies.
“The individualistic system, with emphasis on the nuclear family, is in stark contrast to the traditional extended-household, arranged-marriage, kinship-based systems to be found in societies like China and India, whose values and distinctive characteristics persist to this day, notwithstanding urbanization and a dramatic fall in the size of the nuclear family.
Thus, while marriage in the West is essentially a union of two individuals, in Chinese and Indian culture it involves the conjoining of two families.”
Which system is better? The jury is out.
One thing is certain. We live in interesting times. And like the Author, I too also believe that the face of the world will change ‘If’ and ‘When’ China does get to rule the world.
