The upshot of the Chinese Communist Party's 16th National Congress was that President Jiang Zemin (江澤民) continues to hold firmly on to the reins of power. He has simply given Vice President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) the hollow title of general secretary and planted his own people in key positions by increasing the size of the Politburo standing committee. Thus, he has maintained his hold on power. Some China hands in the US were surprised and perplexed by this because they had predicted that Jiang would retire completely.
Why is it that America's China experts were wrong once again? Princeton University professor Yu Ying-shih (余英時) summed up the problem in a famous line. He said, "John Fairbank and the China hands of his generation all had a common fatal weakness -- they did not understand the CCP's nature at all. In 40 years their predictions about developments in China seem to have invariably been wrong."
In US academic circles, the views of Fairbank and Yu about China could be considered two opposite extremes. Fairbank, who died in 1991, dedicated his life to the study of China. He wrote numerous books and many of his disciples can now be found in US government and academic circles. So his point of view has had considerable influence on US policy toward China. In 1995, when I interviewed columnist Anthony Lewis of The New York Times and our conversation turned to Fairbank, this two-time Pulitzer Prize winner and frequent visitor to China lauded Fairbank as "the US China experts' China expert."
But Fairbank long held an approving view of the PRC. In his autobiography, he wrote that the revolutionary movement led by the CCP could not be suppressed because it embodied peasant liberation and the ideals of democracy and science that have been proclaimed since the time of the May 4 Movement. He finally came to the conclusion that, while communism isn't appropriate for the US, it is appropriate for China.
According to Fairbanks' autobiography, he was the first to suggest that then president Richard Nixon visit Beijing. He told Henry Kissinger, Nixon's national security adviser, that China had a tradition of accepting tribute at the imperial court. By taking the initiative to visit Beijing, the US president would massage Mao Zedong's (
It was only after the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 that Fairbank awoke to reality, saying with exasperation that China was truly exceptional and unfathomable. Prior to his death, he called his last book China: A New History. In it, he corrected some of his own mistaken perceptions. The word "new" in the title indicates that he was reinterpreting China.
Yu may be the most exceptional figure among US scholars of China. He didn't slip into the mainstream mode of romantic thinking about China in the manner of Fairbank. Nor did he resemble other ethnic Chinese scholars like physicists Yang Chen-ning (楊振寧) and Lee Tsung-dao (李政道), who compete to enjoy red-carpet treatment in Beijing. He has never compromised his condemnation of the evils of communism.
I have never interviewed Yu, to ask how he is able to remain clear-headed and uniquely principled, discerning the truth of the CCP's evil nature and voicing his criticism when the historical tide was one of US "experts" vying to demonstrate their lack of understanding and ethnic Chinese scholars toadying to the CCP. From reading his works, however, there are a few clues.
Yu was a specialist in Chinese history. From China's thousands of years of turbulent history, he discovered that revolutionary leaders and instigators of social turmoil are always men on the margins. In his essay "John Fairbank and Chinese History," Yu wrote that throughout Chinese history, the forces leading uprisings have never been peasants engaged in honest work but rather people who are marginal in one way or another.
Huang Chao (黃巢), for example, leader of a peasant rebellion that sacked the Tang Dynasty's capital Chang'an in 879, was a black-market salt dealer. Li Zicheng (李自成), leader of the rebellion that ended the Ming Dynasty, was a local tough who worked as a postal courier. Hong Xiuquan (洪秀全), leader of the Taiping Rebellion, was an unsuccessful candidate in the civil service examinations as well as a Hakka (and therefore margin-
alized in two respects). In times of peace and order, men on the margins rarely have much influence, but in times of turmoil, they have more opportunity to play a role in shaping events.
Yu arrived at this conclusion through his insights into history and his contrasting analysis of the CCP. He wrote that the party with Mao as its leader did indeed inherit a sort of Chinese tradition -- the tradition of marginal people leading uprisings. The 20th century was the golden age of the marginal man in China and revolution provided such men with an ideal arena for their activities. The CCP is the quintessential group of marginal men.
The key difference between Yu and Fairbank is that Yu perceives that the CCP did not represent the interests of the people and certainly did not embody peasant liberation and the ideals of demo-cracy and science that have been proclaimed since the May 4 Move-ment. Moreover, he astutely observed that the characteristics of the CCP, this group of marginal men, are a lack of discipline, lack of ideals, unreasonable behavior, extreme selfishness and utter ruthlessness.
Yu criticized Fairbank as never understanding the most important characteristic of marginal groups -- scorn for all values and norms that are commonly respected in society. Their behavior is utterly unscrupulous, and when they are in revolt, they will stop at nothing to seize power. After seizing power, they go to great lengths to hold on to it. Since they have destroyed civil society and gained complete control of all resources, they are the new ruling class with absolute power.
Today, viewing the CCP's economic reforms and Jiang's so-called transfer of power, it appears that all is proceeding along the lines Yu observed. Every measure is designed to secure the CCP's ruling authority and preserve the imperial authority of "Jiang II." For the sake of this authority, Jiang is willing to use any and all measures. He can propose that capitalists join the party, promote a market economy under the banner of "socialism with Chinese characteristics," or launch a campaign of "smiling diplomacy" aimed at the US and suggest dialogue with NATO.
In order to preserve his own personal power, Jiang went openly against CCP precedent by refusing to allow his anointed successor to make a political report at the 16th National Congress. He wouldn't even give Hu Jintao this tiny opportunity to make an appearance -- behavior more outrageous than that of Empress Dowager Cixi's (
Jiang has also had no qualms about openly increasing the size of the Politburo standing committee to put his own people in influential positions. On Nov. 15, The New York Times wrote, "Of the nine standing committee members, six are Jiang's trusted proteges." On the same day, reporter Henry Chu of the Los Angeles Times sent out his analysis from Beijing, in which he called the succession process a black-box operation. He noted that five of Jiang's proteges on the Politburo standing committee -- Zeng Qinghong (
In the days of Mao and Deng, there was still some concern for keeping up appearances. They made an effort to prevent people from seeing their true natures as "marginal men." Now Jiang is openly demonstrating his ugly nature as a "marginal man." He is ruthless and reckless in the way he greedily grabs power. This serves perfectly to demonstrate that the party he leads is no different from other groups of marginal men like the Taiping rebels -- they have come to a historical dead end.
Cao Chang-ching is a writer and journalist based in New York.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS