Skip navigation

Sign up | Lost password? | Help

荒诞者共和

ABSURDIST REPUBLIC

Posts tagged with "Ideology"

Contesting Confucius

,

Henry Zhao
New Left Review 44
March-April 2007


Henry Zhao on Jean-François Billeter, Contre François Jullien. France’s celebrity popularizer of Chinese philosophy assailed for his political occlusions, amid Confucian crossfire in the PRC itself.

Western scholarship on Chinese philosophy has long remained within its own small specialized ambit: a few scholars teaching a few students, so that the latter in turn may teach a few more students later on. They have constituted a rare species, which respectable universities have chosen to preserve. The subject appeared to have little wider relevance within these institutions, let alone outside. So it comes as quite a surprise to find a debate over traditional philosophy that has been raging in China for nearly a century suddenly blazing out within Western sinological circles, hitherto characterized by library quietness. It is even more astonishing to find the most famous sinologist in France so resoundingly condemned by a more senior fellow-sinologist, and in an eponymously titled pamphlet. If I were François Jullien, I should consider it an honour.

The passionate intensities that arguments over Confucian philosophy have generated in China had seemed unimaginable among those foreign scholars accustomed to watching the conflict with a marveling gaze, but always from a safe distance. Until now. Jean-François Billeter’s pamphlet, Contre François Jullien, burns with the fire of indignation on almost every page. Billeter himself, born in 1939, is a French-Swiss scholar best known for his sociological study of the sixteenth-century rebel thinker, Li Zhi, in the context of the late Ming mandarinate, and for his works on the Daoist classic Zhuangzi. Billeter was responsible for establishing the Sinology Department at the University of Geneva, where he taught until his retirement in 1999. Judging from this blistering text, however, he has not retired from intellectual life. Billeter’s target, François Jullien, has had a more spectacular career. Currently professor of Chinese Philosophy at Paris University vii, Jullien is also a familiar figure in French public intellectual life: interviewed on his work by Le Monde and Le Débat; much in demand by businessmen and investors seeking ‘an understanding’ of China’s multi-millennial culture—without which, they have been assured, it will be harder to turn a profit in the People’s Republic of Confucius, Sunzi and Laozi.

Read more...


Max Weber: The Spirit of Capitalism

Max Weber
Chapter Two
The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

In the title of this study is used the somewhat pre-tentious phrase, the spirit of capitalism. What is to be understood by it? The attempt to give anything like a definition of it brings out certain difficulties which are in the very nature of this type of investigation.

If any object can be found to which this term can be applied with any understandable meaning, it can only be an historical individual, i.e. a complex of elements associated in historical reality which we unite into a conceptual whole from the standpoint of their cultural significance.

Such an historical concept, however, since it refers in its content to a phenomenon significant for its unique individuality, cannot be defined according to the formula genus proximunt, differentia specifica, but it must be gradually put together out of the individual parts which are taken from historical reality to make it up. Thus the final and definitive concept cannot stand at the beginning of the investigation, but must come at the end. We must, in other words, work out in the course of the discussion, as its most important result, the best conceptual formulation of what we here under-stand by the spirit of capitalism, that is the best from the point of view which interests us here. This point of view (the one of which we shall speak later) is, further, by no means the only possible one from which the historical phenomena we are investigating can be analyzed. Other standpoints would, for this as for every historical phenomenon, yield other characteristics as the essential ones. The result is that it is by no means necessary to understand by the spirit of capitalism only what it will come to mean to us for the purposes of our analysis. This is a necessary result of the nature of historical concepts which attempt for their methodo-logical purposes not to grasp historical reality in abstract general formulae, but in concrete genetic sets of relations which are inevitably of a specifically unique and individual character.

Thus, if we try to determine the object, the analysis and historical explanation of which we are attempting, it cannot be in the form of a conceptual definition, but at least in the beginning only a provisional description of what is here meant by the spirit of capitalism. Such a description is, however, indispensable in order clearly to understand the object of the investigation. For this purpose we turn to a document of that spirit which contains what we are looking for in almost classical purity, and at the game time has the advantage of being free from all direct relationship to religion, being thus for our purposes, free of preconceptions.

Read more...


1967: The Explosion Point of Ideology in China

, , ,

Bureau of Public Secrets
SITUATIONIST INTERNATIONAL
16 August 1967


“Le point d’explosion de l’idéologie en Chine” was originally published as a pamphlet August 1967, then reprinted in Internationale Situationniste #11 (Paris, October 1967). This translation by Ken Knabb is from the Situationist International Anthology (Revised and Expanded Edition, 2006).

The international association of totalitarian bureaucracies has completely fallen apart. In the words of the Address published by the situationists in Algiers in July 1965, the irreversible “collapse of the revolutionary image” that the “bureaucratic lie” counterposed to the whole of capitalist society, as its pseudonegation and actual support, has become obvious, and first of all on the terrain where official capitalism had the greatest interest in upholding the pretense of its adversary: the global confrontation between the bourgeoisie and the so-called “socialist camp.” This camp had in any case never been socialist; now, in spite of all sorts of attempts to patch it up, it has ceased even to be a camp.

The disintegration of the Stalinist monolith is already manifested in the coexistence of some twenty independent “lines,” from Rumania to Cuba, from Italy to the Vietnamese-Korean-Japanese bloc of parties. Russia, having this year become incapable of holding a joint conference of merely all the European parties, prefers to forget the era when Moscow reigned over the Comintern. Thus the Izvestia of September 1966 blames the Chinese leaders for bringing “unprecedented” discredit to “Marxist-Leninist” ideas, and virtuously deplores the confrontational style “in which insults are substituted for an exchange of opinions and revolutionary experiences. Those who choose this method confer an absolute value on their own experience and reveal a dogmatic and sectarian mentality in their interpretation of Marxist-Leninist theory. Such an attitude is inevitably accompanied by interference in the internal affairs of fraternal parties.” In the Sino-Soviet polemic, in which each power is led to impute to its opponent every conceivable antiproletarian crime, being only obliged not to mention the real crime (the class power of the bureaucracy), each side can only arrive at the sobering conclusion that the other’s revolutionariness was only an inexplicable mirage, a mirage which, lacking any reality, has now reverted to its old point of departure. Thus in New Delhi last February the Chinese ambassador described Brezhnev and Kosygin as “new czars of the Kremlin,” while the Indian government, an anti-Chinese ally of this Muscovy, discovered that “the present masters of China have donned the imperial mantle of the Manchus.” This denunciation of the new Middle Kingdom dynasty was further refined the following month in Moscow by the modernist state poet Voznesensky, who, evoking the menace of a new invasion of “the hordes of Kuchum,” counts on “eternal Russia” to build a rampart against the Mongols who threaten to bivouac among “the Egyptian treasures of the Louvre.”

Read more...


1978: Ideology in China

, ,

Martha E. Gimenez
Department of Sociology
University of Colorado at Boulder
1978


The politicization of everyday life and social organization that apparently leaves no room for marginality and social isolation appear to indicate that, in China, ideology plays a unique and exceptional role, unlike that which it plays in capitalist societies. The presence of political ideology not only in political rituals, uniforms, posters, and portraits of theoreticians and political leaders, but also in the speech of the people, in their analysis of everyday affairs and everyday life, is a striking contrast to the self-centered individualistic perspective to which we are used to. Ideology, in China, is not only something people read about in books but something that people seem to consciously live and experience. Consequently, visiting China leads Westerners to find obvious and radical contrasts, in that respect, with their own experience. In my view, however, the differences should not be taken for granted but carefully examined to see whether there are differences at all.

It is my purpose in this essay to first relate my own experience and discuss the meaning of the following activities in which all people in China seem to be involved in one way or another: political work/ideological work/ideological education/propaganda. Secondly, I will explore the differences and similarities in the role of ideology in China and in capitalist societies.

Read more...


Robert Weil: We Have Been Here Before: The Cultural Revolution in Historic Perspective in the Global Struggle for Socialism

, , ,

China Study Group
23 May, 2006


On May 27, 1871, what Marx called the "final mass murder" of the supporters of the Paris Commune was carried out at a wall of the Pere Lachaise cemetery there. A plaque still marks the place of their martyrdom, now almost a century and a half old. With their deaths, the first revolutionary proletarian exercise of governmental power in the world came to an end. It had lasted only 72 days. Though the socialist side of the Commune was limited by both the composition of the working classes at the time and the nature of its leadership, it had nevertheless proven the capability of the proletariat for self-government, free from bourgeois control. It thus became enshrined as the initial example of "living" socialism, the realization in practice of the new form of social organization that Marx, Engels, and others had been predicting, advocating and mobilizing for over the preceding several decades.

Read more...


The Cultural Revolution After the “Cultural Turn”

, , ,

by Arif Dirlik
China Study Group
31 dec, 2006


I take it that this occasion on the 40th anniversary of the Cultural Revolution is not a commemoration-which would distance it too far into the past to have any relevance to the present, or a celebration-which would bring it too close to the present as if it might be directly relevant, but an opportunity to reflect on an event of great historical significance, which raised questions which may be as relevant as ever, and perhaps more so than they ever have been. I would like to take this opportunity to reflect briefly on two aspects of the Cultural Revolution that I think were parts of a single revolutionary project: the part played in social transformation by culture(as it is integral to social consciousness), and, a vision of development that was both the condition and the anticipated result of such social transformation.

Read more...


Samir Amin: What Maoism Has Contributed?

, , ,

China Study Group
23 May, 2006


This essay was prepared for the June 9-10, 2006 Hong Kong Conference: “The Fortieth Anniversary: Rethinking the Genealogy and Legacy of the Cultural Revolution” sponsored by the China Study Group, Monthly Review, and the Contemporary China Research Center of City University of Hong Kong. It was translated from the French by Shane Mage.

Read more...


The Cultural Revolution at the Grass Roots

,

Jonathan Unger
The China Journal
January 2007, Issue 57


ABSTRACT
This paper discusses what is known and what is not known about why ordinary Chinese divided into antagonistic factions during the Cultural Revolution turmoil of 1966–68. Using his own interviews with former participants as well as published materials, Jonathan Unger examines the nature and origins of these violent divisions in high schools, universities, factories, government offices, villages, county towns and among ethnic minorities. (pp.109–37)

DOWNLOAD (pdf)
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/papers/ccc/JU_Cultural_Revolution.pdf


Studying Chinese Politics: Farewell to Revolution?

,

Elizabeth J. Perry
The China Journal
January 2007, Issue 57


ABSTRACT
This article offers a critical perspective on the field of Chinese politics. Arguing that China is markedly different from the countries to which it is commonly compared, namely, other Communist and post-Communist societies as well as other East Asian societies, Perry calls instead for a "sober assessment of the techniques of rule perfected by the Chinese Communist state". China's long revolutionary experience, she suggests, has bequeathed to today's leaders remarkably effective methods of "controlled polarization" that serve to divide and rule the society at large. This legacy of "revolutionary authoritarianism" accounts for the regime's capacity to maintain order in the face of extraordinarily unsettling economic and social change. (pp. 1–22)

DOWNLOAD (pdf)
http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/308S/Readings/perry-FarewelltoRev.pdf


Yu Dan: defender of traditional culture, force for harmony

,

Joel Martinsen
Danwei.org
May 8, 2007


There\'s a profile of CCTV Lecture Room sensation Yu Dan in yesterday\'s LA Times. From the article:

She switches with ease between teaching ancient wisdoms glorifying nonmaterial wealth and coaching commercial television on how to produce hit shows. She talks with the authority and formality of a Communist Party official, yet she engages her listeners with personal anecdotes about how her daughter might learn more about the world playing with a bottle and cap than from all the expensive toys in the house.

Yu credits her early classical education with giving her the confidence to believe in herself. She acknowledges that not everything about Confucius is relevant today, but she doesn\'t think it\'s fair to dwell on the negative.

\"There is a lot of prejudice against Confucius for being too conservative or backward,\" Yu said.

\"He teaches love and tolerance, for example, and don\'t force others to do what you would not want to do yourself, how to develop harmonious interpersonal relationships. Are these ideas really that out of date? Are these not useful to our lives today?\"


Yu\'s willingness to pick and choose what she likes from The Analects, and in some cases to misread what the text is actually saying, has drawn criticism from more orthodox interpreters. The Times story quotes Tsinghua\'s Daniel Bell knocking Yu\'s \"feel-good, apolitical version\" of Confucius, while other critics are more nit-picky, complaining that the media professor\'s \"insights\" should be better-grounded in scholarship.

Media critic He Dong a column in BQ weekly examining the true motivations of the anti-Yu Dan crowd:

Who is Yu Dan threatening?
by He Dong / BQ

Yu Dan, an especially articulate woman PhD and professor, became a nationwide sensation for going on CCTV\'s Lecture Room program to talk about Confucius and Zhuangzi. And she\'s not popular solely on TV - afterward, she was hot in the bookstores, too. Yu Dan\'s Insights on the Analects sold over 1.5 million copies in the blink of an eye. Yu Dan\'s road to success really has many PhDs and professors angry. So questions about her and problems with her lectures quickly started assailing her on the Internet. At the same time, there were three strong demands: the media must immediately cease its adulation of Yu Dan, Lecture Room must immediately cease broadcasting Yu Dan\'s programs, and Yu Dan must apologize to the entire nation.


Detoxifying Yu Dan
So who were these people instigating this small cultural demonstration? Careful inspection of its origin reveals nine PhDs and MAs from Peking University and Tsinghua University. There\'s an old Chinese saying that goes, \"A scholars\' rebellion takes ten years or more\"; when scholars form an alliance, they do not wait to launch a revolt against others, but rather dissolve into internal struggles for nine years.

When Yu Dan started speaking on the Lecture Room program, I never expected that the literati would be the first to rise up in fury and protest against her. Yu Dan is opening up a road to television for those bagua teachers, telling people not to bury themselves in stacks of old papers - they should really be deeply grateful to her!

I had thought that perhaps there might be a few television hosts who would rise up and express their displeasure with Yu Dan. For instead of PhDs and professors, she is truly threating those TV hosts who amuse the masses with idiocy all day. I personally witnessed the scene when Yu Dan signed books in Beijing at the Xidan Book Building: she really had the whole town out waiting impatiently! What does such a sensation imply? It means that the audience has become tired of talent competitions and entertainment programs, so a TV show that\'s a bit intellectual and cultured without being dry and uninteresting sweeps up the audience into fevered anticipation as soon as it makes itself known. It\'s obvious that the audience for certain types of cultural TV shows is not limited to Beijing, it is springing forth from all areas of the country.

Those hosts turning somersaults and making faces on TV - are they aware of the crisis that threatens them? No, not at all. They still continue, intoxicated with talent shows and amusing themselves to death! Even when the audience\'s expectation and needs for a new type of television program are staring them in the face, responsive hosts do not appear. Into this, Yu Dan exploded into popularity as a program guest-host.

However, most perplexing is the fact that the TV hosts, who by rights should be sweating bullets, are instead still wallowing in stupid entertainment, and those professors of history and culture, who should be rejoicing, can\'t wait to jump up with unrestrained indignation. Really. It\'s the flood waters swamping the Dragon King\'s temple - family members don\'t recognize each other.

So how should these people afflicted with jealousy and narrow minds be cured? The nine PhDs vehemently cry, \"Immediately cease broadcasting Yu Dan\'s programs, and have her apologize to the entire nation.\" The latent meaning is this: immediately invite the nine wise, valiant PhDs to appear on Lecture Room and promote them on a national scale. Then Chinese culture will have found its savior!

But should the audience really have to pay for their sour grapes?
* * *

Talent competitions and other mindless TV programs have been the focus of official criticism recently; SARFT and other regulatory agencies are attempting to raise the bar for television to drive clean up vulgar, bottom-feeding shows, so Yu Dan seems like she\'d be a breath of fresh air.

But is she truly apolitical, as Daniel Bell says? Writing in Southern Metropolis Daily, Zhao Yong arrives at the conclusion that Yu Dan\'s scholarship is calculated to uphold the mainstream government line, and she suffers so much abuse because she doesn\'t bring anything else to the table. Some excerpts:

Why are we always correcting Yu Dan\'s mistakes?
by Zhao Yong / SMD

[The books] all say that Yu Dan made some mistakes in her lectures on The Analects and Zhuangzi, like explaining \"small man\" (小人) as \"child\" (小孩子). Definitely a mistake, but there\'s little point in correcting this kind of error. The saying goes that you can\'t have a book without mistakes. So mistakes in speaking, in writing, or in printing aren\'t anything to be surprised about....

However, people persist in \"correcting\" Yu Dan. Are there perhaps other problems in her lectures?

After Yu Dan went big, she took part in a web chat on Sina, and one of her responses resonated. The host asked her whether The Analects was required reading for a harmonious society, and Yu Dan responded, \"Actually, The Analects are quite mainstream; that is, many things in The Analects are ideas brought up by our harmonious society today.\".....Looking through relevant explanations in her Insights, perhaps we can find an awakening. Yu Dan says, \"China has always seen harmony as beautiful. And what is true harmony? Exercising tolerance of others, blending together while sustaining different voices and differences of opinion\" (p 62); \"The mental state of the doctrine of the mean is everything situated in harmony. This harmony is when all heaven and earth is in its place (p 110); \"We often hear people complaining that society is not fair, that their lives are difficult. Actually, instead of blaming everyone but yourself, why not examine yourself?\" (p 49) - Oh, turns out that this book talks about the importance of the \"harmonious society.\" If you blame everyone but yourself, your voice sharp and loud, then everyone will be fraught with anxiety; if everyone remains in their places, thinking behind closed doors at night, performing self-inspections three times a day, then this would probably gradually enter a beautiful phase of harmony. Looking at it like this, we really can\'t underestimate the insights Yu Dan has gained from The Analects. It may be an entertaining document produced out of the Lecture Room program, but why can\'t it be the political document that mainstream ideology has been waiting for? The new moderator of Lecture Room, Wang Liqun, said that when Yu Dan lectured on her insights from The Analects over the National Day holiday, it came out swinging. The reaction was huge after it aired, and caught the attention of the government. The old guy\'s really cute, telling the media such secrets. What ought we to do?

Some might ask, is it wrong for Yu Dan to take old things for new uses, for living scholarship? No, no one will say that she\'s wrong. That the thought of Confucius and Laozi became the mainstream discourse through successive dynasties says that they do indeed possess something that mainstream discourse may make use of. So there is absolutely nothing wrong with Yu Dan\'s very mainstream desire to make the harmonious society borrow the climate of The Analects. What\'s wrong is that she\'s a scholar, a classic intellectual according to the western definition. And as an intellectual, she ought to have her own system of discourse and means of expression. We\'ll not talk here of Said\'s \"speak truth to power\"; rather, we\'ll go back to Max Weber\'s standpoint, scholars that take academics as a \"vocation\" ought to maintain a certain neutrality of values. But we cannot see this in Yu Dan\'s Insights. In this way, her position immediately becomes suspect: when she stands speaking on the Lecture Room dias, it is obvious that she appears in the person of a modern academic, but why is it that her thinking and her lecturing resemble a scholar-official from the feudal society? A member of the modern intellectual class has undoubtedly undergone the baptism of the May Fourth New Culture Movement, yet you\'ve made your explanations like the vestiges of the old society. How can this please people?

Recently, the media asked Chen Danqing for his views on Lecture Room. He said that Lecture Room was a product of drills - there\'s only one voice, only one tone, only one format, and he couldn\'t take it. \"I finally watched Yu Dan\'s program. Her gestures and tone are all guided by CCTV. I cannot bear that stuff.\"


December 2008
M T W T F S S
November 2008January 2009
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31