Press "Enter" to skip to content

Author: jeforte

Kang Youwei

Published May 17, 2022 by jeforte

KANG Youwei (1858-1927) was a prominent Chinese public intellectual and reformer, best known for his socialist interpretation of Confucianism and radical reforms. Kang grew up during the end of the Qing dynasty and was an influential voice in guiding China’s development and modernization at the start of the 20th century. An advocate of constitutional monarchy, Kang saw Meiji Japan as a model for China’s future development. This view earned him the ire of his contemporaries, leading Kang to be branded as a heretic.

Kang and his student Liang Qichao participated in the Hundred Days’ Reform effort in 1898, the failure of which forced Kang and Liang to flee to Japan to escape execution. Kang’s subsequent travel through Europe and Canada cemented his belief in the danger of revolution, opting instead for reform. Kang would later return to China, and in 1917 attempted to overthrow Sun Yat-sen’s newly established Republic and restore a Qing monarch to the throne. This did not go very well, however, as public sentiment had by this time shifted heavily against monarchism, and after becoming suspicious of his compatriot General Zhang Xun’s motives, Kang abandoned the effort. While public opinion weighed against Kang by the end of his life, his ideas would continue to influence Chinese thinkers for decades to come. His most influential work, Datong Shu (大同書) or “Book of Great Unity,” argued for the dissolution of traditional Chinese family structures (to be replaced with governmental institutions), the liberation of women, the implementation of socialist-style welfare, and the advancement of Chinese technology to improve quality of life.

FURTHER READING

De Bary, Theodore and Richard Lufrano, eds. Sources of Chinese Tradition, vol. 2. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 2000.

Brusadelli, Federico. Confucian Concord: Reform, Utopia, and Teleology in Kang Youwei’s Datong Shu. Leiden: Brill, 2020.

Leave a Comment

Hundred Days’ Reform Movement

Published May 17, 2022 by jeforte
The unfortunate six

After China’s defeat in the Sino-Japanese War in 1895, a group of civil service examination candidates led by Kang Youwei wrote the “Ten Thousand Word Memorial,” which advocated for a series of reforms aimed at modernizing China along Western lines. After being largely ignored by the Qing government, in 1898 Kang caught the attention of the Guangxu emperor, who granted him an audience with high government officials.

The emperor agreed with the suggestions of Kang and his fellow reformers, and began to issue edicts. If allowed to stand, these edicts would have radically transformed Chinese society, abolishing the civil service examination system, revising the code of law, and promoting western industry and technology. As these reforms directly targeted traditional Chinese power structures, however, they sparked fierce opposition from the ruling classes, who rallied behind empress dowager Cixi and enacted a coup deposing the Guangxu emperor. As a result of this Kang and his student Liang Qichao were forced to flee to Japan to avoid execution, but six of their fellow reformers were not so fortunate. The Hundred Days’ Reform Movement is especially interesting because despite its failure, many of its proposed reforms were later adopted (such as the abolition of the civil service exam system or the adoption of western science and medicine), suggesting that the movement’s failure could have been as much on the part of the reformers to make their suggestions politically viable as it was a reaction of vested interests against social and technological reform.

FURTHER READING

Luke S. K. Kwong. “Chinese Politics at the Crossroads: Reflections on the Hundred Days Reform of 1898.” Modern Asian Studies 34, no. 3 (2000): 663–95. http://www.jstor.org/stable/313144.

Leave a Comment

Hu Shih

Published May 17, 2022 by jeforte

HU Shih (1891-1962) was a Chinese literary critic, politician, and philosopher. He is best known for his advocacy of the use of Chinese vernacular, which greatly democratized literature in China. Born in Shanghai, Hu distinguished himself by becoming a national scholar, and went on the study at Cornell and Columbia University in the United States. At Columbia Hu studied philosophy with the pragmatist John Dewey, whose views would greatly influence Hu. Upon returning to lecture at Peking University, Hu started writing for the journal New Youth, and quickly became a prominent public intellectual. In various publications, Hu advocated for a “new literature” written in vernacular Chinese (baihua) and thus freed from the tyranny and constraints of the “dead” classical language (wenyuan).

This would prove hugely transformative for China’s nascent literary movements, as the switch to vernacular enabled many more people to read, write, and otherwise critically participate in literature. At the same time, Hu advocated for a broad application of Dewey’s pragmatic methodology, including the use of the scientific method in the study of traditional Chinese literature. Following the May Fourth incident in 1919, however, these pragmatist convictions would lead Hu to split with the communists, as he saw abstract doctrines like Marxism or Anarchism as being unable to offer solutions to the real issues China faced. Hu’s relations with the nationalists were similarly tenuous, but he would nevertheless go on to serve as ambassador to Washington and later Chancellor to Peking National University. When the communists seized power in 1949, Hu fled to New York City, before settling in Taiwan, where he would live the rest of his life.

FURTHER READING

Shih, Hu, and Chih-P’ing Chou. English Writings of Hu Shih Chinese Philosophy and Intellectual History, 3 vols. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2013.

Grieder, Jerome. Hu Shih and the Chinese Renaissance: Liberalism in the Chinese Revolution, 1917-1937. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1970.

Chou, Min-Chih. Hu Shih and Intellectual Choice in Modern China. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1984.

Leave a Comment

Gamal Abdel Nasser

Published April 1, 2022 by jeforte

Gamal Abdel NASSER (1918-1970) was an Egyptian politician who played a prominent role in shaping the region’s politics in the twentieth century. Starting his career in the Egyptian military, Nasser rose in rank and formed a close circle of allies (many of them fellow officers in the army). After participating in and surviving the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, in July of 1952 Nasser and 89 of his compatriots (the “Free Officers”) ousted King Farouk I in a coup, seizing control of the government. After some internal power struggles, Nasser emerged as Prime Minister in 1954, and quickly got to work instituting his policy platform, which would come to be known as Arab Socialism. Nasser’s policies aimed at modernizing Egypt, improving the material living conditions of its people, addressing inequality in land distribution, and instituted basic healthcare and welfare measures, as well as a minimum wage and provisions designed to help women. In 1956, the United States and Britain pulled out of an agreement to provide $270 million to fund the first stage of Nasser’s most ambitious public works project, the Aswan High Dam. In response, Nasser announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal, income from which Egypt could use to fund completion of the dam.

Britain and France did not take this well, resulting in the armed conflict known as the “Suez Crisis.” Although the Egyptian air force was decimated in this conflict, Nasser and Egypt emerged from the conflict with great prestige and appeared to be a model for how Arab countries could stand up to and resist domination by imperial powers. Nasser’s dream of an Arab socialist republic did not last, however, and following Egypt’s defeat in the 1967 war against Israel, many in the Arab world came to see Nasserism and socialism as failed solutions, especially given the economic struggles the Soviet Union was facing around this time, and accordingly looked to other alternatives, paving the way for the real rise of Islamic radicalism.

FURTHER READING

Gettleman, Marvin E., and Stuart Schaar. The Middle East and Islamic World Reader. New York, NY: Grove Press, 2012.

Leave a Comment

Edward Said

Published April 1, 2022 by jeforte

Edward SAID (1935-2003) was an outspoken critic of the field of orientalism and was hugely influential in redefining how scholars approach the field. Born to Palestinian parents in Jerusalem, Said attended the Egyptian branch of Victoria College in Cairo and then North Field Mount Herman in Massachusetts. As an Arabic-speaking Palestinian in these heavily English-dominated schools, Said frequently felt like an outsider, caught between identities in a space that denied his very existence. These boyhood experiences proved highly formative for Said, and by the time he graduated from Princeton in 1957 Said had become an insightful literary critic.

His most famous work is Orientalism (1978), a deconstruction of the field of “oriental” scholarship, which had long been dominated and shaped by western interpreters. Said’s primary argument is that the very notion of the “Orient” presupposes certain assumptions about the superiority of the west and deprives people who actually live there (“Orientals”) from telling their own stories, by means of a process of othering, in which non-western peoples come to be understood as “other” and fundamentally different or lacking in some way (compared to Westerners), often culminating in the elevation of trivial (superficial and/or cosmetic) differences to the level of constituting different natures. In this manner, people who have been “othered” can cease to be considered human and lose any associated human rights and dignities. Because this Orientalists perform this othering subconsciously, Said takes it upon himself to demonstrate the various ways in which these presupposed power-relations have shaped the west’s creation of the “Orient,” in large part through contrast to the West (or “Occident”). Said’s goal in writing Orientalism was to change discourse within the field of orientalism and more broadly, so as to allow “Oriental” voices to be heard and enable those voices to take the lead in shaping how their history is taught and understood, through new, authentic perspectives. After all, shouldn’t a people be allowed to shape its own legacy?

FURTHER READING

Said, Edward W. Orientalism. London, UK: Penguin Books, 2019.

Leave a Comment