Building an understanding of China

I am often sadden by the state of understanding of China. This was despite the 'contemporary' anthropological papers I have read in the recent months. It came to my attention that among the common held positions on China, most of the Chinese views were missing, labeled 'traditional.' Whereas these thinkers had the more 'contemporary' understanding. But what is meant by 'contemporary' and what is 'traditional?'

For example, in my term paper, I wrote that the idea of harmony is one where 'there can be no parts wrongly present, and everything exists belongs' (Mote, 1989). The author, Frederick Mote, was a Sinologist and Professor of History at Princeton. This idea was rejected in my class as 'traditional.' Anthropologists documented harmony as communist invention to control the Chinese society.

In another instance, I mentioned in class discussion that Chinese family emphasized the division of labor more than equality between sexes. This idea was also labeled as 'traditional.' Anthropologists documented Chinese tradition as male domineering and oppressed the female. However, in my process of growing up, I have seen about half of Chinese families as female domineering.

I urged anyone who can grab a Chinese who grew up in any Chinese societies (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, or even Korea, Japan) and ask him about the above. Ask them what is harmony. Ask any female what she aspires to be. Remember that being an anthropologist means that you are trying to understand another person from his/her point of view. You do not color this perspective with your cultural principles, such as equality or freedom.

I am afraid the effects of dismissing anything foreign and different as 'traditional' is a sure way towards cultural imperialism. By dismissing other culture's history, you set yours own as the actual history. By dismissing other culture's reality as oppressive, you set your future as the only right path.

Looking at China today, I felt that one big point missing in Chinese anthropology is that a different future is brewing in Asia, a continent largely driven by Confucius ideals. I do not think it is going back to imperialism, nor is it heading to American type democracy. An important Chinese anthropologist often (purposely or not) overlooked by American anthropologists is Fei Xiaotong. He documented the development of Chinese societies as not entirely autocratic nor democratic. However, the emphasis on communal agreement and wise leadership is very historically bounded and I highly recommend anyone who is interested in understanding Chinese thinking to read either Frederick Mote or Fei Xiaotong. Another non-academic but broad reading on development of Asian societies is Lee Kuan Yew's second memoir: Singapore, from Third World to First.

The future of Asia is in the making, but it is not 'that' future.