China's fixation on the Opium Wars are the cornerstone on which the foundation of the Communist Party of China's legitimacy rests. When you go visit the gargantuan National Museum of China on the east edge of Tiananmen Square, the section on modern Chinese history begins with the first Opium War in the 1840's. So began China's century of humiliation at the hands of foreign imperialist, ending after "liberation" by the communists at the end of the civil war. At least this is how the story goes in China today.
Of course the two wars between Britain and China did happen, and yes they were fought over British efforts to import opium into China, this fact no one disputes. China's historians historical narrative differs from the wider world's regarding why the Chinese military and state failed so spectacularly during the wars. The principal differences between Chinese and non-Chinese historical writings about the war are Chinese historians' efforts to dance around several key issues; bureaucratic mishandling of resources, military discipline, and the loyalty of average Chinese subjects (or average Zhou's if you prefer).
I know it will sound terrible, but I found stories about imperial bumbling of the wars incredibly entertaining at least for the first Opium War. All the Chinese commanders, including at one point a 15-year old boy, seem so preoccupied with not having their heads chopped off that they falsify dispatches of incredible victories for the emperor, all while while their junks are literally blown out of the water. Yes even 175 years ago 差不多 accounts of personal accomplishments from Chinese males permeated the Chinese landscape. Lovell's account of the second Opium War is considerably shorter, darker, and a much more decisive victory for the British and their allies French.
The last third of Lovell's book focuses on how the communists have used the Opium Wars to justify their rule since the party's inception, and how the party's interpretation is a complete facsimile of their adversaries who fled across the Taiwan Strait. Note: Chairman Mao once served as the director of the Nationalist's propaganda department before a political purge. Under successive dictatorships China's role in history went from China being its own worst enemy, to a backward nation colonized by all of the imperialist powers simultaneously.
The reason for this transition is simple. The former meant focusing on systemic problems within Chinese society and how they exacerbated problems during the wars, turning them into debacles. The latter just meant focusing on the idea of China as a backward country that needed a ruling force with a firm hand to guide it along the path to "development". 发展至上. As a foreigner looking at China through my personal lens, the myth of the latter truly reigns supreme in government propaganda about the war.
This month I finished both Lovell's impressive book The Opium War and Preston's less impressive The Boxer Rebellion. Be on the lookout for a future post about Beijing's prominent role in the rebellion.
Of course the two wars between Britain and China did happen, and yes they were fought over British efforts to import opium into China, this fact no one disputes. China's historians historical narrative differs from the wider world's regarding why the Chinese military and state failed so spectacularly during the wars. The principal differences between Chinese and non-Chinese historical writings about the war are Chinese historians' efforts to dance around several key issues; bureaucratic mishandling of resources, military discipline, and the loyalty of average Chinese subjects (or average Zhou's if you prefer).
I know it will sound terrible, but I found stories about imperial bumbling of the wars incredibly entertaining at least for the first Opium War. All the Chinese commanders, including at one point a 15-year old boy, seem so preoccupied with not having their heads chopped off that they falsify dispatches of incredible victories for the emperor, all while while their junks are literally blown out of the water. Yes even 175 years ago 差不多 accounts of personal accomplishments from Chinese males permeated the Chinese landscape. Lovell's account of the second Opium War is considerably shorter, darker, and a much more decisive victory for the British and their allies French.
The last third of Lovell's book focuses on how the communists have used the Opium Wars to justify their rule since the party's inception, and how the party's interpretation is a complete facsimile of their adversaries who fled across the Taiwan Strait. Note: Chairman Mao once served as the director of the Nationalist's propaganda department before a political purge. Under successive dictatorships China's role in history went from China being its own worst enemy, to a backward nation colonized by all of the imperialist powers simultaneously.
The reason for this transition is simple. The former meant focusing on systemic problems within Chinese society and how they exacerbated problems during the wars, turning them into debacles. The latter just meant focusing on the idea of China as a backward country that needed a ruling force with a firm hand to guide it along the path to "development". 发展至上. As a foreigner looking at China through my personal lens, the myth of the latter truly reigns supreme in government propaganda about the war.
This month I finished both Lovell's impressive book The Opium War and Preston's less impressive The Boxer Rebellion. Be on the lookout for a future post about Beijing's prominent role in the rebellion.
No comments:
Post a Comment