The myth of Chinese exceptionalism

[yahya07]

By Yuan-kang Wang:

Steve (and others) have written about American exceptionalism. It won't surprise you to learn that China has its own brand. Most Chinese people -- be they the common man or the political, economic, and academic elite -- think of historical China as a shining civilization in the center of All-under-Heaven, radiating a splendid and peace-loving culture. Because Confucianism cherishes harmony and abhors war, this version portrays a China that has not behaved aggressively nor been an expansionist power throughout its 5,000 years of glorious history. Instead, a benevolent, humane Chinese world order is juxtaposed against the malevolent, ruthless power politics in the West.

The current government in Beijing has recruited Chinese exceptionalism into its notion of a "peaceful rise." One can find numerous examples of this line of thought in official white papers and statements by President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao, and other officials. The message is clear: China's unique history, peaceful culture, and defensive mindset ensure a power that will rise peacefully.

All nations tend to see their history as exceptional, and these beliefs usually continue a heavy dose of fiction. Here are the top three myths of contemporary Chinese exceptionalism.

Myth #1: China did not expand when it was strong.

Many Chinese firmly believe that China does not have a tradition of foreign expansion. The empirical record, however, shows otherwise. The history of the Song dynasty (960-1279) and the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) shows that Confucian China was far from being a pacifist state. On the contrary, Song and Ming leaders preferred to settle disputes by force when they felt the country was strong, and in general China was expansionist whenever it enjoyed a preponderance of power. As a regional hegemon, the early Ming China launched eight large-scale attacks on the Mongols, annexed Vietnam as a Chinese province, and established naval dominance in the region.

But Confucian China could also be accommodating and conciliatory when it lacked the power to defeat adversaries. The Song dynasty, for example, accepted its inferior status as a vassal of the stronger Jin empire in the twelfth century. Chinese leaders justified their decision by invoking the Confucian aversion to war, arguing that China should use the period of peace to build up strength and bide its time until it had developed the capabilities for attack. In short, leaders in Confucian China were acutely sensitive to balance-of-power considerations, just as realism depicts...continued

Must admit was taken by surprise, I myself was a victim of the mantra of the pacifism of ancient China we often hear. Written by Chinese also.

 

[SinoChallenger]

Must admit was taken by surprise, I myself was a victim of the mantra of the pacifism of ancient China we often hear. Written by Chinese also.

Of course China is not a peaceful country. How do you think we became so big?

China totally wiped out the Huns, the Mongols, the southern barbarians (cousins to Vietnamese), the southeast barbarians (cousins to Burma) and assimilated the Manchu.

 

[Raphael]

Many Chinese firmly believe that China does not have a tradition of foreign expansion. The empirical record, however, shows otherwise. The history of the Song dynasty (960-1279) and the Ming dynasty (1368-1644) shows that Confucian China was far from being a pacifist state. On the contrary, Song and Ming leaders preferred to settle disputes by force when they felt the country was strong, and in general China was expansionist whenever it enjoyed a preponderance of power. As a regional hegemon, the early Ming China launched eight large-scale attacks on the Mongols, annexed Vietnam as a Chinese province, and established naval dominance in the region.

This is bullcrap. Attacks on Mongols were pre-emptive and defensive in nature, because Ming feared another Yuan. Ming also destroyed its own navy.

Vietnam invasion, like the Sui invasion of Goguryeo, were undeniably offensive in nature, but they were made to prevent the disintegration of the tributary system.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

Of course China is not a peaceful country. How do you think we became so big?

China totally wiped out the Huns, the Mongols, the southern barbarians (cousins to Vietnamese), the southeast barbarians (cousins to Burma) and assimilated the Manchu.

We know thats why Xinjiang and Tibet are presently control of China., definitely not by peaceful means.

But thats true for every kingdom and every country in world in earlier times. All the kings and emperors wanted to expand their teritories.
India might be only country in world where it has never attacked the foreign nations.

 

[Toot Toot]

Of course China is not a peaceful country. How do you think we became so big?

China totally wiped out the Huns, the Mongols, the southern barbarians (cousins to Vietnamese), the southeast barbarians (cousins to Burma) and assimilated the Manchu.

You wiped out so many races and yet you are calling them Barbarians. Exceptional logic!

 

[yahya07]

I should've posted this one:
Myth 2: The Seven Voyages of Zheng He demonstrates the peaceful nature of Chinese power.

In the early fifteenth century, the Chinese dispatched seven spectacular voyages led by Zheng He to Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, and East Africa. The Chinese like to point out that Zheng He's fleets did not conquer an inch of land, unlike the brutal, aggressive Westerners who colonized much of the world. Instead, they were simply ambassadors of peace exploring exotic places.

This simplistic view, however, overlooks the massive naval power of the fleet-27,000 soldiers on 250 ships-which allowed the Chinese to "shock and awe" foreigners into submission. The Chinese fleet engaged in widespread "power projection" activities, expanding the Confucian tribute system and disciplining unruly states. As a result, many foreigners came to the Ming court to pay tribute. Moreover, the supposedly peaceful Zheng He used military force at least three times; he even captured the king of modern-day Sri Lanka and delivered him to China for disobeying Ming authority. Perhaps we should let the admiral speak for himself:

"When we reached the foreign countries, we captured barbarian kings who were disrespectful and resisted Chinese civilization. We exterminated bandit soldiers who looted and plundered recklessly. Because of this, the sea lanes became clear and peaceful, and foreign peoples could pursue their occupations in safety."

 

[medulla]

We know thats why Xinjiang and Tibet are presently control of China., definitely not by peaceful means.

But thats true for every kingdom and every country in world in earlier times. All the kings and emperors wanted to expand their teritories.
India might be only country in world where it has never attacked the foreign nations.

No mate Chola dynasty extended their territories.

 

[EjazR]

No mate Chola dynasty extended their territories.

So did Ashoka in his time.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

No mate Chola dynasty extended their territories.

i know it but except the CHola dynasty, hardly any other Indian ruler extende boundaries beyond the subcontinent.

 

[huzihaidao12]

I should've posted this one:
Myth 2: The Seven Voyages of Zheng He demonstrates the peaceful nature of Chinese power.

In the early fifteenth century, the Chinese dispatched seven spectacular voyages led by Zheng He to Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, and East Africa. The Chinese like to point out that Zheng He's fleets did not conquer an inch of land, unlike the brutal, aggressive Westerners who colonized much of the world. Instead, they were simply ambassadors of peace exploring exotic places.

This simplistic view, however, overlooks the massive naval power of the fleet-27,000 soldiers on 250 ships-which allowed the Chinese to "shock and awe" foreigners into submission. The Chinese fleet engaged in widespread "power projection" activities, expanding the Confucian tribute system and disciplining unruly states. As a result, many foreigners came to the Ming court to pay tribute. Moreover, the supposedly peaceful Zheng He used military force at least three times; he even captured the king of modern-day Sri Lanka and delivered him to China for disobeying Ming authority. Perhaps we should let the admiral speak for himself:

"When we reached the foreign countries, we captured barbarian kings who were disrespectful and resisted Chinese civilization. We exterminated bandit soldiers who looted and plundered recklessly. Because of this, the sea lanes became clear and peaceful, and foreign peoples could pursue their occupations in safety."

I said, China does not have a perfect record, but the closest to perfect. 7 times of large-scale ocean, only one or two exceptions, compared to European settlers how to treat Africans, three use of force, it is a true angel, even if It is not perfect.

 

[iajj]

all nations yearn for natural borders and fight for it, and the degree of success determines the degree of their racial greatness: in this sense, anglo-americans in north america, russians, historical romans, french, wilhelmine germans, and chinese are racially superior to turkics and indians. but it is the character that these races assume after reaching their natural borders that shows you whether they can make a pacifist, satisfied power or just greedy murderers and innate warmongers, and in this regard, french, germans, and above all chinese have behaved better than soviets, romans, and the most depraved, sinister and sanguinary of the bunch, americans. just because hans repeatedly wiped out many turkic tribes to the west, mongol groups to the north, viet peoples to the south, no one can deny that the passion for peace is in hans' genes and indeed belongs to our civilizational memory. it is this long record of pacifism that gives chinese the indisputable claim to hegemony in continental asia and the birth right to punish naughty japs, bonzis, viets, turkics, hindus and filipinos when they misbehave.

 

[Sonyuke_Songpaisan]

You wiped out so many races and yet you are calling them Barbarians. Exceptional logic!

One core value of Chinese culture is 华夷之辨， which means Barbarian and Chinese distinguishing. It's shameful for Han to adopt other people's culture because Chinese thought our culture is the best.

 

[ephone]

We did not wipe out those races. We simply defeated them.

BTW, it is them who attacked China at first since they did have better military hardware, e.g. better horses, arrows and etc.

China suffered quite a few defeat at first before we finally defeat them.

After those defeats, those Huns, Turks or whatsoever simply chose to move somewhere else.

The reason they were called barbarians simply due to the fact that China has better knowledge to raise crops, construct buildings, weave clothes and etc. Those Huns or Turks then were nomads and even though they were militarily quite strong but their daily lives were quite miserable. They had to rob China's towns or normal people for those daily living stuff, e.g. crops, clothes and etc.

You wiped out so many races and yet you are calling them Barbarians. Exceptional logic!

 

[fly2012]

Most wars fought by Han empires were defense in nature. Ming attacked Mongols not to expand, but to prevent another Mongol invasion. Same goes Han dynasty on Huns, Tang dynastry on Turks. That's the reason most Han people still live in the place their ancestor lived thousands years ago. The only unprovactive wars that I can think of are on Vietnam. For whatever reason those emperors felt that Vietnam should be part of the central kingdom. It China was as agressive as European settlers, it wouldn't have built the Great War to stay inside the war with so much population.

Current China boundary is pretty much defined by Manchu empire Qing.

 

[northeast]

Most wars fought by Han empires were defense in nature. Ming attacked Mongols not to expand, but to prevent another Mongol invasion. Same goes Han dynasty on Huns, Tang dynastry on Turks. That's the reason most Han people still live in the place their ancestor lived thousands years ago. The only unprovactive wars that I can think of are on Vietnam. For whatever reason those emperors felt that Vietnam should be part of the central kingdom. It China was as agressive as European settlers, it wouldn't have built the Great War to stay inside the war with so much population.

Current China boundary is pretty much defined by Manchu empire Qing.

Those defensive dynasties make me sick，they are cowards and become corrupt and retarded easily.