Foundinchina.com

Economical with his anniversaries?

It’s going to be a big year of anniversaries for China, as Jonathan Fenby  wrote in his article for the Guardian yesterday. In the great Chinese tradition of rote learning and the reduction of history to a politically tolerable list of names, dates, and events, it is also likely to be a year of selective memory for Chinese leaders.

Here are a few salient points from Fenby’s article:

History is still an intensely political matter in China but can, by its nature, be hard to control in the popular memory.

The echoes from the past are evident, from the central-provincial relationship to Tibet, from corruption to top-down rule and from regime legitimacy to the current harassment of signatories of the Charter 08 petition calling for greater political freedom.

…The approved version is written by those on top. Inconvenient events are either air-brushed out or presented in a stylised manner to fit current needs, as in the insistence that by crushing the 1989 protests the party and the army served the interests of the people.

…Hu’s personal link with the suppression in 1989 and the presence of his lieutenants in the territory’s administration increase the stakes. The crackdown on the Charter 08 movement has shown how concerned the politburo still is with dissent, however peaceful.

Holding up a distorting mirror to the past can be a tricky exercise when present realities provide a more challenging narrative. The snag for Hu Jintao and his colleagues is that they have only one version of history to present in this year of anniversaries, even if it is one that does not withstand examination.

The article is well worth reading in full.

Although Fenby is undoubtedly correct in saying that the version of history likely to be presented by Chinese leaders this year is not going to be one that can “withstand examination”, the real issue lies in the suppression of peoples’ will to examine in the first place.

It’s not that questioning, investigation, and scrutiny of the official word are uniquely western predilections, but rather that the scope and insistence of Beijing’s ‘message’ has rendered mute the voice of domestic inquiry. Indeed, the present wave of nationalistic fervour has strengthened opposition to those who would dare examine Chinese history without CCP blinkers. 

To this end the Chinese leadership are sitting comfortably, safe in the knowledge that any attempts by journalists, bloggers, historians, or intellectuals to present a more balanced view (or discussed at all on some issues) can be effectively spun as ‘western propaganda aimed at stifling China’s rise’. 

That is not to say there are no brave individuals in China willing to speak out against their repressive regime, or that non-Chinese commenters should give up their critiques of a government that stunts the intellectual growth of a nation by refusing to allow alternative viewpoints.

It is to be hoped that the growing number of seasoned, well-informed commenters among the expat community in China will lend their talents to a more open and objective discussion of 2009′s anniversaries, such that, several decades from now, we might one day be celebrating the anniversary of end of closed historical debate in China.

One such commenter, Jeremiah Jenne of the excellent Jottings from the Granite Studio, regularly writes ‘on this day in history’ articles for his site. They are always well-researched, well-balanced, and well-written. As a Qing historian teaching and researching his PhD thesis in Beijing, his writing also offers a fascinating insight into the historical record as it relates to China.

There’s certainly no shortage of important dates to keep him occupied in 2009, and they will be a must read for anyone with even a passing interest in this year’s anniversaries.