Quality, or Suzhi, of a Society

Suzhi 素质 is frequently written and described in anthropological discourses about China. It is indeed very visible in official and unofficial commentaries in China. Suzhi, or quality, is a loose term trying to point out the 'backwardness' of Chinese in today's world. However, its actual definition, e.g. pariotism, wealth, or intelligence, varied according to context (Fong, 2007).

I cannot help but think suzhi discussion is not uniquely Chinese. At least if you consider the use of similar words. For example, knowledge economy, American dream, or freedom of the society, were all similarly vague terms. Knowledge has not been well defined. American dream can means anything from wealth to hobby. Freedom can means anything from safety to free speech. All these ambiguities were meant to spur the society forward, acknowledging that every individual in a society has an important role to play.

About the Chinese suzhi, I just returned from San Francisco, and was waiting for the cable car (actually more like an old tram) at the fisherman wharf. In front of me was a caucasian family. Behind was .... ops, where did this Chinese family came from? I did not remember them being there when I first joint the line. Anyway, we waited a long time for the next car, and people were starting to whine. Finally, our car arrived. The family in front boarded first, and then it was, or supposed to be my turn, if not for the family behind me running for the front seats, shoving their way through. It was a vivid scene because I had not been in the same situation for more than a year, since I arrived in California, Irvine.

I am saying this because I do not think suzhi lies so much in personal qualities such as wealth, grades, or intelligence. Rather, I have seen people who are not well educated contributed tremendously to others. In world of warcraft, many of the best modders started with little programming knowledge, but worked their way deep into the nights to reach pinnacles of the trade. Moreoever, they worked so that others may benefit from the small addons they created. They share their knowledge in forums, chatrooms, and books.

I felt that the little incident I had at the cable car station in SF is not an isolation, but a microsm of a Chinese weakness, and conversely an American strength. I had a Chinese friend who worked in the US for almost 4 years. He told me that if you pit an American to a Chinese, you found that the Chinese always wins (I assume this is a scholarly competition). But if you pit a group of Americans to a group of Chinese, the Americans win. There is something about the society that I felt relationship matters more than each individual. If people care for each other more, everyone benefits. If people only care for themselves, then everyone looses. In fact, this is not even an American wisdom, because Chinese has it too, among the lately revived wisdoms of Confucius.

If that Chinese lady has not shoved me and we sat on the cable car peacefully. Perhaps we would talk. Perhaps I can share something I know about SF with her, and so can she. We may both benefit from the relationship, perhaps not. But I am sure nothing ever comes out of negative relationship. They only leads to societal segregation.

So goes my little discourse on suzhi of a society: that the links matter more than the dots.

--------------
Fong, 2007. Morality, Cosmopolitanism, or Academic Attainment? City and Society, 19, 1.