Ma Rong
Professor and doctoral supervisor of Liberal Arts, Peking University, former head of the Department of Sociology and former director of the Institute of Sociology and Anthropology of Peking University. His research interests include regional development studies, population migration studies, urbanization studies, ethnic relations studies, and Tibet studies; he is the author of "Population and Society in Tibet", "Ethnic and Social Development", and "Applied Research on Sociology".
When studying the changes in human society and culture, conceptual history and discourse analysis are important theoretical entry points and comparative analysis methods commonly used by social scientists. Today we often use the concepts of "state" and "nation", but the modern meaning of these two concepts has only been introduced from distant Europe to the discourse system of Chinese in modern times. These two words are extremely important whether they deal with the political, economic, and cultural exchanges between countries in the world today, or when we think about and deal with the differences in identity between different groups in the country. In the civilization system and discourse of ancient China, did it spontaneously produce similar concepts? How did ancient Chinese understand the world and the surrounding population? If some of the concepts we use today come from external civilizations, how did these concepts with exotic cultural overtones and civilizational connotations impact the traditional concepts of Chinese in modern times? Are there certain controversies arising in today's Chinese in understanding and using these concepts, and what exactly do these controversies mean? How should today's Chinese view our country, and how should we view people who live on both sides of the border but have some commonalities in terms of ancestral lineage, language and religious beliefs? The Chinese government has officially identified 56 "nationalities", so how should we understand our "national identity" and "national identity"? What does this identity really mean in modern social life? When thinking about the above issues, combined with the major changes in modern Chinese society and the transformation and reshaping of the discourse system, systematically reviewing and sorting out the relevant conceptual evolution process may have some enlightenment for our understanding of the ethnic issues in China today.
I. "Country" and "World" in Chinese Cultural Traditions
To discuss the concept of "country" in traditional Chinese culture, it is necessary to compare it with the concept of "tianxia". "In the history of Chinese political thought, 'Tianxia' and 'Guo' are two long-standing juxtaposition concepts. The meaning of 'tianxia' is '(Chinese) empire', in other words, 'the world'. So 'Tianxia' means China is the world. The 'state' is a local administrative unit, part of the 'empire' of ancient times, equivalent to the 'state' of the modern world. ...... In the early days, the 'kingdom' was a body of power, and in contrast, 'tianxia' was a body of values" (Levinson, 2009: 80).
"Tianxia" is the boundary of the "country" in the ideal of Chinese, and the "people under the world" share a common value ethic. "Da Ze also benefits the world", "Cherish the world", "The world rises and falls, and the pifu has the responsibility" (Gu Yanwu). The highest ideal of ancient Chinese scholars was "to establish a heart for heaven and earth, to establish a destiny for the people, to continue to learn from the saints, and to open up peace for all the worlds." From the perspective of today's international politics, the "tianxia" in traditional Chinese thought is neither the "empire" of the ancient West nor the "nation-state" of modern Western times, nor is it related to Huntington's "clash of civilizations", but "a world political system of an anti-imperialist nature" (Zhao Tingyang, 2011:1), which is the imagination of a human community that transcends the division of "nation-states" and religious groups. The "state" in Chinese history is the specific ruling imperial court in different eras, and can also be used to refer to the surrounding local separatist regimes. In China, "the changing destiny of such a civilization, such a vast and complex history, is condensed in the changes in the relationship between the concepts of 'heaven under heaven' and 'state'" (Levinson, 2009: 80).
The word "guo" appears very early in Chinese historical texts. On the basis of archaeological excavations, Mr. Su Bingqi proposed the development route of "ancient culture, ancient city and ancient country" and the trilogy of "ancient country- Fang country - empire" of the origin of ancient Chinese countries. He argues that:
"Before xia, Yao Shunyu, the center of activity was in the Jinnan area, and the emergence of the word 'China' was also at this time. ...... At this time, the concept of 'China' can also be said to be 'consensus China', and the Xia, Shang, and Three Dynasties, due to the maturity and development of the Fang State, there has been a loose federal 'China', Zhou Tianzi's ideal 'under the heavens, mo fei wang land, leading the land coast, mo fei wang chen' ideal 'tianxia'. From the consensus of 'China' (the legendary Era of the Five Emperors, the exchanges and mutual recognition between major cultural regions) to the ideal China (the political and cultural reorganization of the Xia and Shang Dynasties), to the real China, the Qin and Han Empires, it has also experienced the development of the 'trilogy'. The process of the formation of the concept of 'China' is also the process of continuous combination and reorganization of many ancestors of the Chinese nation" (Su Bingqi, 2013: 120).
During the Shang, Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn Warring States periods, there were many juxtaposed "states" (Fang states). After Qin Shi Huang unified China, it changed to the county system, but in the war and chaos at the end of the Qin Dynasty, many "states" appeared, and after that, not only did the local separatist regimes call themselves "states", but after the unification of the Han Dynasty, they divided the princely states. Although the Wei Shu Wu Ding Li period was listed in the history books as the "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", each leader was called the "Emperor" and regarded himself as The Orthodox Chinese and pursued national unification, such as Zhuge Liang's "Table of Teachers" the goal of "reviving the Han Dynasty and returning to the old capital". The Western Jin Dynasty divided 27 imperial families into kings, and the subsequent Sixteen Kingdoms of the North confronted the Eastern Jin Dynasty. The Compendium of General History of China refers to the regimes of the Northern and Southern Dynasties as "states", the Central Plains regimes after the Sui and Tang dynasties as "dynasties", and the surrounding external regimes (such as Goryeo) as "states". This system of titles continued until the end of the Qing Dynasty.
Looking at the titles in Chinese history, "state" can be divided into two categories: the first refers to the princely states that were partially sealed within the Central Plains Imperial Dynasty, which no longer appeared after the Western Jin Dynasty; the second type refers to the peripheral or foreign regimes, with which the Central Plains Imperial Dynasty often referred to itself as "Heavenly Dynasty" or "China" when interacting with them. Therefore, the concept of "state" used by the ancient Chinese is completely ineligible with the "state" of "nation-state" in our international political context today. These "states" in Chinese history had different systems, and the boundaries governed by each dynasty were determined by the political strength of the Central Plains Dynasty at that time, and were in constant flux. The vast majority of today's "nation-states", with the exception of a few areas that have been disputed for historical reasons, usually have clear and stable territorial boundaries in today's international system, state sovereignty recognized by international law, complete legal and administrative systems, and clear population boundaries, that is, all nationals holding their passports. Regardless of their political and cultural background (ethnic, linguistic, religious differences), migration experience and when they acquired citizenship in their home country, they are protected by international law and their governments. If we understand the "state" in ancient Chinese history with today's modern concept of the state, it is naturally full of errors.
When we analyze the relationship between "tianxia" and "guo" in the Chinese civilization tradition, there is a special issue that needs to be paid attention to, that is, the difference between "subjugating the country" and "subjugating the world". Gu Yanwu wrote in the "Rizhilu" that the imperial court "changed its surname and changed its name, which is called the destruction of the country", and the social etiquette collapsed and was happy, "benevolence and righteousness are full of congestion, and as for the beast to eat people, people will eat each other, which is called the death of the world". The Central Plains regime can change dynasties, and even the barbarians on the frontier "enter the Central Plains", which can be called "subjugated countries". However, as long as the "Heavenly Dao" and the value ethics system of Chinese civilization can be maintained, and the way of Confucius and Mencius and the examination of the imperial examination can be restored, it is not considered to be "the death of the world". Although the old and the young widows of the former dynasty remembered the former dynasty from the standpoint of "being loyal to the king" and felt the pain of "subjugating the country," "if the readers oppose the imperial examination, refuse to be eunuchs, and openly do not cooperate with the upper regime, they will lose their economic status, and they will not be able to cultivate for agriculture, that is, they will enter the market to do business, and from then on they will no longer be able to fulfill their duties of carrying on the traditional culture of the nation." ...... If you want to carry the responsibility of national traditional culture, you can only be born as a eunuch... He should be elected as an official, so that he will embark on a compromise with the foreign regime. Only in this way can they also carry the national culture that they value most" (Qian Mu, 1994: 850).
The traditional Chinese culture and the fate of the country faced an important historical turning point after the Opium War. At the request of the great powers, the Qing Dynasty's self-designation was changed to "Great Qing Kingdom", no longer a "Heavenly Dynasty" carried by Fengtian, but only one of the world's nations. This has undoubtedly led to a fundamental shift in the worldview and identity consciousness of the Chinese. "In the 19th century, the external 'state' (concept) was forcibly stuffed into China, and some Chinese ideas were disturbed as a result" (Levinson, 2009: 84). China's civilization system with a "view of the world" has now been forced into the tights of the "nation-state" (Sun Longji, 2004: 21). Since then, the Chinese intellectuals' understanding of "state" has inevitably accepted the meaning of "nation-state" in Europe. At this time, the "country" is no longer the "country" in the traditional Chinese concept.
At this time, not only the original "world" was gone, but the actual "country" was constantly divided, and a large part of the country was reduced to foreign colonies and semi-colonies, and even those "two devils" from other colonies in the concession did not regard Chinese as human beings and arbitrarily humiliated them. At this time, although this "country" has not been officially destroyed, it seems that it is not far from the time of death. In the face of this situation, Tan Sitong could only sigh: "There is nothing in the world to reach the spring sorrow, and weep and rest together." Forty million people burst into tears, where is the end of the world is Shenzhou! At that time, people of insight were all thinking about the road to China's salvation and survival. The Opium War of 1840 was a historical turning point in the Chinese of the concept of "state.".
"The formation of 'China' as a national name has its own special historical background. During the dynastic period (before 1912), which was centered on the concept of tianxia, China did not formally, permanently and stably adopt 'China' as the name of its own country, but replaced the name of the country with the name of the dynasty. After the rise of the nation-state consciousness imported from the West in modern times, as the final result of the subjective construction process of nationalism, 'China' condensed into the official name of China's state, constituting Chinese ididing its identity" (Li Yangfan, 2014: 39). Xiang Biao put forward the concept of the "framework state", believing that the Chinese people's understanding of the "state" is almost close to Rawls's concept of "justice as fairness", which is a spiritual basis for the coexistence of different groups. In modern times, in order to save the survival of the people, Chinese strive to build a nation through the form of a political state (Xiang Biao, 2010).
Second, the concept of "nation" and "nationalism" from the West
The word "ethnic" is often seen in Chinese historical documents, but that is not the concept of "nation" that we use today. "In ancient Chinese texts, the word 'ethnic' is often used, and the words "people", "people", "species", "tribe", "class", and "people", "people", "people", However, the combination of 'people' and 'clan' into one noun is a later matter. In 1903, the modern Chinese bourgeois scholar Liang Qichao took the Swiss-German political theorist and jurist J. After K. Brunchelli's concept of nationality was introduced to China, the word nation became commonly used in China, and its meaning was often confused with the concept of race or state, which was closely related to the influence of the concept of nationality in Western Europe" (Ya Hanzhang, 1986: 302). In the classification and analysis of the 121 "clan" characters in the Zuo Zhuan and the 35 "clan" characters in the Chinese, we find that they all express blood groups such as family, clan, clan and in-laws, and none of them are used to represent the minority ethnic groups at that time ("Barbarian Rongdi") (Ma Rong, 2004: 392), which shows that the word "clan" in traditional Chinese culture has nothing to do with the "barbarian" at that time, and at the same time is not a general reference to different ancestral/cultural groups. This shows from another perspective that the concept of "nation" accepted by Chinese today is not from the tradition of Chinese civilization, but is the product of Western ideology introduced from the outside.
With the development of capitalism in Western Europe, the "third class" and the citizen class hoped to establish a new type of state government, thus getting rid of the various constraints and restrictions on the development of the monarchical autocracy and the feudal division system at that time, so that capital, raw materials, labor, and products could flow freely according to market demand. Representatives and thinkers of the third estate, such as freelance industrialists and businessmen, put forward the concept of "nation", calling for reference to the traditional boundaries of the original country, taking language and religion as the basis for the identity of the people, and establishing a new political entity ("nation state" in terms of geography and population range with "nation" as the unit and embodying the republican spirit, which is the "nationalism" that arose in Western Europe in the 17th century.
Anthony Smith argues that two types of "nationalist" models have emerged in recent times. One is the Western European "civic model of the nation," which consists of four elements: (1) historically formed territories; (2) the formation of a legal and political community; (3) the equal rights of all members in law and politics; and (4) the common culture and ideology. Such nationalist movements were represented by the French Revolution and the American Revolutionary War. The other is the "an ethnic model of the nation" that emerged in Eastern Europe and Asia under the onslaught of imperialism, characterized by: (1) kinship over territorial identity; (2) strong emotional mobilization; and (3) an emphasis on indigenous culture (language, values, customs and traditions) over laws (Smith, 1991: 11). Focusing on ethnic origin, language and religion is a traditional human identity model, and the "ethnic nationalism" that has appeared in Eastern Europe and Asia in modern times is rooted in blood communities and indigenous traditional cultures, and is born of the "nationalism" trend introduced by Western colonists.
When the Opium War broke out in 1840, the great powers continued to force China to sign unequal treaties and pay reparations through wars of aggression. Li Hongzhang exclaimed that China is facing "a major change unprecedented in three thousand years." In the face of persecution by the Western powers, Chinese first tried to "master the strengths of the division to control the yi", which Mr. Qian Mu called the "armed revolution"; then tried to change the law, that is, the "political revolution"; after the failure of Wushu, some people believed that traditional Chinese culture was the source of all evils that led to the country's downfall, and a "cultural revolution" appeared, and put forward radical slogans such as "etiquette and cannibalism", "hitting Confucius's shop", "loading books on the line and throwing toilets", "abolishing Chinese characters" and "completely Westernization", advocating "overthrowing China's own traditional culture and historical lessons" (Qian Mu, 1994：912）。 It is also reasonable to go to the doctor for the disease. Chinese eager to absorb new ideas and political theories from the "strong and vibrant" external Western civilization, and the concept of "nation" entered the vision of Chinese intellectuals of all nationalities under this special situation. Under the pressure of the great powers, the Qing court opened "foreign affairs", sent students to stay in The West, allowed foreigners to run schools in China, and translated a large number of Western publications into Chinese, and the "national" ideas and "nationalism" trends originating in Western Europe also entered China and influenced the intellectual classes and people of various groups in China.
The appearance of the Word "nation" in Chinese dates back to the seventeenth year of Daoguang (1837), when an article entitled "Joshua Descended to the Kingdom of Canaan" was published in the September issue of the Monthly Chronicle of the Eastern and Western Examinations compiled by the Prussian missionary Guo Shili (also translated as Guo Shila, translated by Karl Gützlaff) and compiled by Huang Shijian, in which it was written: "In the past, the nation of Israel crossed the Jordan River by land" (Fang Weigui, 2002). Although used only in Israel, it is likely that the word "nation" first appeared in Chinese literature. The large number of Chinese "ethnic" words appearing and used to refer to Chinese ethnic groups such as Han, Manchu, and Mongolian should be derived from Japanese literature. "The words 'national' and 'national' are both new Chinese words borrowed by intellectuals in the late Qing Dynasty from the Japanese, but their ambiguity is large" (Shen Songqiao, 1997). Under the severe situation of saving the country and saving the country, Chinese scholars want the country to be strong and prosperous, and began to consider reconstructing the Chinese "nation" concept and the modern "state" with reference to the Western "nation-state" model.
However, the concept of "nation" Chinese and its specific orientation in China are consciously imported into China by Westerners out of sinister intentions. Before and after the Opium War, the countries surrounding China successively became colonies of the great powers, and imperialist military, economic, and religious forces infiltrated into China's frontier areas in a vain attempt to turn China into a colony like India. But unlike India, which was in a state of division, the Qing Dynasty maintained national unity at that time, and the military and civilians of all ethnic groups fought against the imperialist powers. In the face of a unified China of 400 million people, the great powers found that military conquest was half the work, and the smartest way was to take advantage of the differences in language and religion of the various groups under the jurisdiction of the Qing Dynasty and a certain political independence in history, to call the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, Tibetan and other groups "nation", and to instill the concept of "national self-determination" in the elites of each group to support their "national independence" activities. Among them, the entry point of Japanese imperialism's most efforts is to encourage the anti-Manchu sentiment of the Han elite and use Japan as a base to support various "anti-Manchu" organizations and individuals. The Japanese never used the term "Indochina" to refer to Mongols, Manchus, Tibetans, etc., deliberately limited the scope of "China" to Han residential areas (the so-called "Eighteen Provinces"), vigorously advocated "Han nationalism" and put forward the concept of "China Headquarters", which directly affected the "inner" and "outer" views of the Chinese and laid the groundwork for its division of China (Gu Jiegang, 1939a). The words "Mongols", "Manchurians", and "Han Nationalities", which were directly translated from Japanese into Chinese characters, were also directly introduced into China by students studying in Japan at the end of the Qing Dynasty, and filled the Chinese newspapers and periodicals at that time, thus causing confusion in the thinking of people of all ethnic groups in China when they understood the meaning of the word "nationality", and it has been inherited to this day. This is the general historical background that we absolutely cannot ignore when we think about China's "national issue" today.
Third, how to call the groups with different ethnic origins and different cultural characteristics in Chinese history
Since the end of the Qing Dynasty, under the influence of concepts and terminology used in foreign publications, many Chinese scholars have not only referred to the frontier minorities in the Republic of China period as "nationalities", but also traced back to the source, referring to the Han Chinese and various frontier groups in ancient China as "nationalities". We have seen that the various "Chinese national histories" published one after another refer to the historical Xiongnu, Xianbei, Khitan, Jurchen, Mongol and other groups as "nationalities", and strive to explore how these ancient peoples evolved into the "nationalities" of China today. These discussions objectively guide people to use the modern concept of "nation" to trace back and sort out the group relations in ancient China, and further use the ancient "nation" pattern to argue for the political future of today's "nations", and take "national self-determination" and the establishment of an independent "nation-state" as options, which completely brings the Chinese groups to a dead end. But this may be precisely the original intention of Westerners and Japanese to introduce the concept of "nation" to China.
As mentioned above, there has never been a group concept of "nation" with modern political connotations in traditional Chinese culture, so we should not apply the word "nation" bluntly to various groups in Chinese history before the Opium War. We can discuss the historical evolution of the "Chinese nation" as a political-cultural community, but it is not appropriate to discuss their respective "national evolution history" as "nationalities" of the various groups in Chinese history.
So, how should we call those groups in Chinese history with different ethnic origins and different cultural characteristics?
Anthony Smith's book The Ethnic Origins of Nations (1986) is devoted to the origins of modern national history, using the term "ethnic origins." The title of the book has been translated by domestic scholars as "The Racial Origin of Nations" (Yao Dali, 2007: 55), and I think it may be more appropriate to translate it as "Ethnic Origin of Nations", because the English word for "race" in Chinese is usually race, and the translation of equalic group(s) and equality as "ethnic group" and "ethnicity(sex)" has gradually been accepted by Chinese academics. Many Western scholars use the term "ethnic group" when referring to human groups before modern nationalist movements. "Before 1908, the meaning of 'nation' coincided almost identically with the so-called ethnic unit" (Hobsbawm, 2000:20). Whether discussing the current issue of "ethnic minorities" in China or the issue of group relations in ancient China, "ethnic groups" is a very useful and widely applicable concept.
"Race is a vague and ambiguous term, usually defined as a group of people interlinked by physical genetic characteristics", and with the common phenomenon of blood confluence in human society, the use of the concept of "race" has gradually decreased, and sometimes with negative overtones (such as a critique of "racist" trends). When using the concept of "ethnic group," Western scholars generally emphasize the cultural identity of the group. "Members of ethnic groups are grouped together by cultural connections that may have different origins. ...... The term ethnicity is useful because it appropriately draws attention to cultural similarity, which is more important and explanatory to social scientists than racial similarity" (Landis, 2001: 182). Some people in China have translated the English "ethnic" and "ethnicity" into Chinese "nation", which is confusing two important concepts.
A new word, ethnicity, emerged when people increasingly used the term "ethnic group" to discuss groups within societies with different cultural characteristics (such as language, religion, customs, etc., which may also be related to ethnic origin). In the 1970s, some prominent American scholars suggested the use of this neologism and "ethnic groups" to reflect the new pluralistic social reality and represent social minorities and subgroups (Glazer and Moynihan, 1975: 5). "To a large extent, ethnicity is created and recreated in the social life with which people interact on a daily basis, and the emergence of ethnic groups and their meaning are related to social circumstances, encounters, and the way people deal with the needs and competitions in life" (Eriksen, 1993: 1). There is no doubt that a country like the United States, which contains a large number of minorities with differences in skin color, language, religion, etc., is certainly inappropriate to call them "nation", because all American citizens constitute "American nation", and some minorities do not have significant physical differences, such as Chinese, Vietnamese, Koreans, etc. as different "racial groups" (racial groups). Therefore, the use of the concept of "ethnic group", which is broad in connotation, not strong in political color and vague in boundaries, to refer to minorities within countries that are mainly culturally different and have a large number of inter-ethnic marriages is more applicable and easily accepted by the majority of the people. Anthony Smith's use of the word "ethnic" in The Ethnic Origins of Nations to discuss the historical origins of modern nations is an important implication for Chinese scholars. As we all know, many groups in Chinese history are mixed by blood, "you have me, I have you" (Fei Xiaotong, 1989: 1), it is difficult to think of them as different "ethnic groups", and they do not have the political connotation of modern "nation". Therefore, we can also call the various groups in Chinese history that have differences in ethnic origin, language, culture, etc. "ancient ethnic groups" instead of using the term "ancient ethnic groups".
IV. The "Republic of the Five Nationalities" and the "Chinese Nation"
In 1905, the Qing court decided to "abolish the imperial examination and revitalize the new learning", and a large number of students studying in Japan and publications of Japanese characters became an important medium for Chinese absorbing a complete set of Western knowledge systems carried by Western discourse. When "Han Nationality", "Manchu Nationality", "Mongolian Nationality", "Tibetan Nationality", etc. became popular discourses in Chinese society, what should be the basic idea of "nation-building" in China after that? What role should the "nations" under the qing dynasty play in the subsequent state system? These fundamental questions were bound to be put on the agenda, and thus a fierce debate broke out between the royalists, which emphasized the preservation of the Chinese culturalist tradition (constitutional monarchy), and the revolutionary party, which advocated Han nationalism (the expulsion of the Tartars). Kang Youwei called on the Qing court to delete the Manchu and Han dynasties, and to correct the name of the country as "The State of China", so that the Manchu, Han, Mongolian, Hui, and Tibetan nationalities would all be the same country, "contracted, forever guessing suspicion", and "regiments and large groups, to strengthen China" (Shen Songqiao, 1997). Zhang Taiyan declared in 1903: "Reverse beard, not my race" (Zhang Taiyan, 1977: 233). In the Revolutionary Army, Zou Rong called for "expelling the Manchurians living in China, or killing them to avenge them", and "exterminating five million Manchurian species with strange hair and horns" (Zou Rong, 2002 [1903]: 55, 7). Stimulated by the fierce trend of Han nationalism, the Contradiction between Manchu and Han deteriorated sharply.
Mr. Liang Qichao is a major advocate of the discourse of "nationalism" in modern China. In 1902, he first proposed the concept of "Chinese nation" in his article "On the General Trend of Changes in Chinese Academic Thought". Since all ethnic groups in China had generally accepted the discourse that Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, and Tibetan were "nationalities", in 1903 he put forward the view of "big and small nationalism": "Those who speak chinese nationalities should advocate great nationalism in addition to small nationalism. What about the little nationalists? The Han Chinese are also for other ethnic groups in the country. What about the great nationalists? The various ethnic groups under the subordinate departments of the United Provinces are also for the foreign tribes", and only by "combining Han and Manchu, Combining Mongolia, Mongolia, Miao, and Tibet to form a great nation" can China save its survival (Liang Qichao, 1989 [1903]: 75-76). Mr. Liang Qichao strives to use the "big nationalism" concept of the Chinese nation to offset the possible harm caused by the "small nationalism" of the Han chinese and various ethnic groups, and to avoid the possible division between the various ethnic groups in China under the instigation of imperialism. Yang Du also advocates defining the "Chinese nation" from a "culturalist" rather than a "racist" standpoint: "If you want to know why the Chinese nation is such a nation, it is already defined in the name of its nation. It is similar to the Western theory, and the actual is adopted in the cultural theory, and the back is in the bloodline theory" (Yang Du, 1907). In the special historical scene of the late Qing Dynasty, "in order to directly transform the multi-ethnic empire into a modern nation-state, it is necessary to eliminate ethnic contradictions within the 'empire' and use 'China' as a political and cultural symbol that transcends ethnic relations." The main feature of the nation-state system is internal unity, that is, a high degree of integration of ethnic, linguistic, cultural and political systems, while empires contain extremely complex ethnic, linguistic, cultural and institutional factors" (Wang Hui, 2008: 823).
At the beginning of the 20th century, a group of Manchu and Mongolian flag bearers who stayed in Japan founded the Datong Bao in Tokyo, Japan, advocating that "the Manchu and Han people are equal and that manchuria, Han, Mongolia, Hui, and Tibet should be unified as a major citizen." The Manchu MuDuli published an article in the No. 5 of Datong Bao, clearly stating: "The people of China are all of the same nationality and the people of different races, and there are differences between words and customs, and sometimes assimilated. Therefore, assimilators are also one of the elements of creating a new nation" (Huang Xingtao, 2002). This reflects the influence of Western thought at that time, and a group of Manchu and Mongolian elites also began to accept the "citizen's 'national' model" and "national" as the core identity concept.
After the Xinhai Revolution, the "Republic of the Five Nationalities" officially replaced "expelling the Tartars and restoring China" as the leading idea for the founding of the Republic of China. When Sun Yat-sen became the "Provisional President," he declared that "if the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, and Tibetan hui regions are one country, then the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, and Tibetan tribes are one person, and it is the unity of the nation" (Sun Yat-sen, 1981:2), clearly proposing that the Han,Manchu, Mongolian, and Tibetan nationalities should unite to establish a common "nation-state" for all Chinese. After the founding of the Republic of China, Chinese intellectual circles further discussed the concepts of "Chinese nation" and "nationality". In the 1928 edition of A Short History of the Chinese Nation, Chang Naide pointed out: "Since the beginning of time, China has been a unified country, with only the name of the dynasty and no name of the country. Until the overthrow of the Qing Dynasty, the name of the Republic of China also appeared. There is no certain name of the country, and the name of the nation is not uniform. Or Xia, or Huaxia, or Han, or Tang, Ranxia, Han, and Tang are all the names of dynasties, not ethnic names. However, the word 'Zhonghua' is adopted by the name of the Republic of China today, and its meaning is broad, and it is most appropriate than other names that are partial and incomplete" (Chang Naide, 1928: 5). Several works of Chinese National History (Wang Tongling, 2010 [1934]; Lu Simian, 1934; Lin Huixiang, 1939), published in the 1930s, also reflect the influence of Western "nation-state" ideology, and the good intentions of Chinese scholars to enhance national cohesion by reconstructing "national history".
After the outbreak of the Xinhai Revolution, in 1912 the British encouraged the 13th Dalai Lama to "drive out the Han", and in the same year, Tsarist Russia forcibly occupied the Tangnu Wuliang Sea. In 1922, the Soviet Union forcibly occupied Outer Mongolia; in 1931, Japan established "Manchukuo" in the northeast, instigated the Mongol princes (Dewang) of Chahar to establish an "Inner Mongolia Autonomous Government", planned the establishment of the "Northwest Return to China", and launched an all-out war of aggression against China in 1937; in 1940 Wang Jingwei established a Han puppet regime in Nanjing. Under the severe threat of the collapse and disintegration of the country, only by emphasizing the "unified Chinese nation" can the Government of the Republic of China establish a national anti-Japanese united front.
The War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression of 1931-1945 was the largest national crisis faced by all Chinese during the Republic of China period, and in the face of the fierce Japanese army, the people of all ethnic groups and even every Chinese had to make their own choices. Activities such as the Northeast Anti-Japanese Coalition Army, the North China Huimin Detachment, the Daqingshan Mongolian Banner Independent Brigade, the "Xinjiang People's Anti-Imperialist Federation" (Zheng Huiting, 2011), and the construction of the Yunnan Burma Highway by people of all ethnic groups in Yunnan show that all Chinese at that time threw themselves into the tide of anti-Japanese salvation. As the "March of the Volunteer Army" sings: "The Chinese nation has reached the most dangerous time, and everyone is forced to issue a final roar." "From the perspective of 'nationality', which contains the dual meaning of 'nationality' and 'ethnicity', the War of Resistance can be regarded as the first 'all-people' mobilization war in Chinese history. China's minority ethnic groups have also truly gained the historical experience of being integrated with the han people's life and death, and their fate and common destiny, and have further established the rudiments of the Chinese national consciousness in addition to the ethnic consciousness, which is of positive benefit to the construction of the state in modern China, the integration of the state, and the 'Chinese nationalization' and 'ethnic minority' of the non-Han people in China", which can be called "the Nationalization of minority ethnic groups under the baptism of the War of Resistance" (Wu Qine, 2015: 146).
It was also at the most critical moment of the War of Resistance Against Japan that Mr. Gu Jiegang solemnly put forward the view that "the Chinese nation is one" in 1939: "All Chinese are the Chinese nation -- within the Chinese nation we should never separate any more nationalities." ...... From now on, we must absolutely and solemnly use the word 'nation'; we have no distinction between nationalities at home and only one Chinese nation externally! (Gu Jiegang, 1939b) At that time, some scholars started from the origin and cultural differences such as physique, language, and religion, and believed that China's Manchus, Mongolians, Hui, and Tibetans were all "nationalities" from the standpoint of "ethnic nationalism." This great debate around the concept of "nation" in 1939 marked a new stage in the Chinese's understanding of the modern concept of "nation" at the historical juncture of national crisis (Ma Rong, 2016).
V. The "double-line" theory of "culturalism" and "nationalism" in the process of Chinese history
Mr. Duzanchi believes that Chinese history runs through the two parallel "double lines" of "culturalism" and "nationalism". The "nationalism" mentioned here is not the "nationalism of citizens" in Western Europe as defined by Smith, but only the "nationalism of ethnic groups" that emphasizes blood and cultural differences (Smith, 1991: 11). If we go back to ancient China, a more accurate reference would be "elitism." Mr. Duzanqi believes that during the powerful period of the Central Plains Imperial Dynasty, the culturalist concept of "tianxia" adhering to the concept of "religion and no class" dominated, but once the Central Plains Imperial Dynasty declined and faced the cultural crisis of "the world under the fall", in order to maintain the continuation of Chinese civilization, the Han people would abandon "the divergent concept of the Empire under heaven and replace it with a well-defined concept of Han and the state, yidi has no place in it" (Du Zanqi, 2003: 47), thus giving rise to the "ethnic nationalism" identity that attaches importance to blood, at this time" Yidi "is no longer an object of condescending "indoctrination" in the Central Plains culture, but has been described as an "outlier" who is untrustworthy and uncivilized. Luo Zhitian believes that when the Han regimes were strong in the past, they often used cultural superiority as the criterion for distinguishing Huayi; conversely, when the Ji dynasty declined, he instead emphasized the inheritance of blood and used it as "the defense of Jianyi Xia" (Luo Zhitian, 2011: 37-51).
"If you are not of my race, your heart must be different" is often misinterpreted as a classic expression of a racist "ethnic view" in the Chinese cultural tradition (Han Jinchun and Li Yifu, 1985: 5). The Jinren Du Pre's annotation to the Phrase "Non-Wu Ethnicity" in the Spring and Autumn Left Transmission of Justice is "with a different surname from Lu" (edited by Li Xueqin, 1999:717). At that time, there were many clans and surname groups within the State of Lu and the State of Chu, and the "surname different from Lu" mentioned here can only be understood to mean that the Chu royal family and the Lu royal family do not belong to the same surname group. Therefore, "although chu is large, non-Wu people are also" cannot be broadly understood as "the Chu state and the Lu state do not belong to the same ethnic group or race." The "clan" in traditional Chinese culture refers to the family, clan, and clan, and has nothing to do with the modern concept of "nation" and "race". If carefully examined, "if you are not of my race, your heart must be different" is not enough to prove that the Chinese civilization tradition contains "racist" concepts (Ma Rong, 2004), but this sentence has gradually added racist overtones in later generations.
In the last years of the Qing Dynasty, out of extreme dissatisfaction with the Qing Government's fainting and traitorousness, the "ethnic nationalism" sentiment of the Han intellectual class was unprecedentedly high under the guidance of the concept of "nationality" from abroad, and the concept of "imperial Han nationality" and the slogan of "expelling the Tartars and restoring China" were put forward, and the "Han nationality" was equated with the "Chinese nation." Stimulated by foreign forces and the narrow "Han nationalism" of the Han people, the Manchus, Mongols, Tibetans, Northwest Turkic language groups, and even the Miao people in the southwest have put forward their own "nationalism" construction and political demands, which completely deviate from the inter-ethnic relations model in the tradition of Chinese civilization and make China face a critical situation of disintegration. Levinson argues that "the cause of Chinese nationalism and its essence is the emotional alienation of intellectuals from traditional Chinese culture" (Levinson, 2009: 77).
"The origins of modern Chinese nationalism are rooted in traditional ethnic thinking, but it became a 'ism' after cleaning up japanese and Western doctrines. At that time, Japan's nationalist doctrine was basically an imported product. Therefore, what the Chinese scholars really cleaned up was the Western doctrine of nationalism." "Before the mid-19th century, China's various doctrines of behavior were difficult to call nationalism" (Luo Zhitian, 2011: 5, 9).
The remarks of radicals at the end of the Qing Dynasty, such as Zhang Taiyan, Chen Tianhua, Zou Rong, and others, carried strong anti-Manchu and Manchu Han nationalist sentiments. Kang Youwei, a representative figure of the royalist party who advocated a "constitutional monarchy", adhered to the "culturalist" position of the Chinese Confucian tradition, believing that the Manchus had accepted Chinese culture instead of "Yidi". "Kang Youwei believed that the (Chinese) group was made up of people with a common culture, rather than being confined to just one ethnic (Han Chinese) or ethnic minority group" (Duzanqi, 2003: 64). Recognizing that overthrowing the Qing Dynasty under the banner of Han ethnic nationalism would lead to the separation of the frontier ethnic groups from China, "Sun Yat-sen and the newly established leaders of the Republic of China tried to supplement their own racist narrative structures with the narrative structure of the culturalist view of nationality expounded by their political enemies, the Reformers and the Qing court." The Chinese nation began to consist of the 'five ethnic groups' (Manchu, Mongolian, Tibetan, Hui, and Han), so that the Chinese nation continued to inherit the borders of the Qing Empire" (Du Zanqi, 2003: 66-67). This is the dialectic of historical development, where the intellectual elite of the Chinese nation constantly alternately changes their positions on a parallel track with a double line.
VI. "Nation" and "Nationality"
What is the relationship between the two concepts of "state" and "nation" introduced into China after the Opium War in Western society? In Western European societies, State refers to the ruling government, and nation refers to the nation-state composed of all "citizens" of a country and the basic identity of "citizen nationalism". The French Republic during the Revolution and the United States of America after the Revolutionary War were both "nation-states" based on this identity, strictly speaking, "national states", and all citizens of their countries (regardless of ancestral blood, color, language and religious beliefs) were members of the "nation". The French nation, the American nation, and the Indian nation may be more in line with their essential meaning if translated as "French nation," "American nation," and "Indian nation" in Chinese, and the racial, linguistic, and religious differences within these three "nations" are no smaller than the group differences within China. The translation of "United nations" to "united nations" is appropriate. Therefore, the Chinese nation can also be completely translated as "Chinese nationality". Sun Yat-sen said in the first lecture of the Three People's Principles: "What is nationalism? According to the social situation in Chinese history, I can use a simple sentence to say that nationalism is nationalism" (Sun Yat-sen, 2001 [1924]:2). In the 20th century, from the 1930s to the 1990s, many Chinese scholars discussed the concept of "nationality" (Yuan Yeyu, 1936; Pan Guangdan, 1995; Ning Sao, 1995; Zheng Fan et al., 1997), and the essence of this discussion was to explore how to distinguish the "nationality" (the Chinese nation) from the "nationality" (Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, Tibetan, etc.) at the level according to China's actual national conditions, so as to establish a Chinese national community that can reflect the "pluralism and unity" formed in China's history. A new political identity system that can also be accepted by all groups in the country in the real social scene.
During the Republic of China period, "Chinese nation" and "nationality" and "Chinese nationality" were commonly used concepts in newspapers and periodicals. After 1949, in order to distinguish it from the discourse system of the Kuomintang rule, the discourses such as "Chinese", "Guowen", and "Guobei" were no longer used. In the 1950s, the government organized the "ethnic identification" work and officially identified 56 "nationalities". The use of the same word "nation" at the two levels of completely different natures of 56 "nations" and "Chinese nation" is naturally easy to cause confusion in people's thinking and understanding. If we consider adjusting the terminology, we can have two choices: one is to change the name of "Chinese nation" to "Chinese nationality" and keep the title of 56 "nations" unchanged, but "Chinese nation" has become a fixed term and will involve the adjustment of the terms of many official documents such as the national anthem; the other is to keep the title of "Chinese nation" unchanged, corresponding to the English "Chinese nation", and to refer to the 56 ethnic groups collectively as "ethnic groups" (referred to as "×× ethnic groups") in English. Correspondingly, of course, this also exposes us to many adjustments to commonly used terms. Either option will help Chinese to clearly distinguish between two core concepts that may be confusing with each other in their specific use (Ma Rong, 2000: 10).
Academic translations of the Chinese word "nation" have also influenced the translation of official Documents of the Chinese Government. For example, the official English translation of the report of the 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in 2017 is as follows: "Chinese nation", "ethnic minorities", "different ethnic groups", "regional ethnic autonomy", and "the people of all ethnic groups" groups）。 The Constitution of the Communist Party of China, most of which was revised and adopted, also translates concepts such as "ethnic minorities" as "ethnic minorities." However, "to date, the official text of the Constitution of the Republic of China still uses 'minority nationalities' instead of 'ethnic minorities' to translate 'minorities', 'the people of all nationalities' instead of 'the people of all ethnic groups' to translate 'peoples of all ethnic groups', and 'regional' national autonomy" instead of 'regional ethnic autonomy' translates 'ethnic regional autonomy'" (Ye Jiang, 2018:1). The different English translations of the keyword "nation" Chinese clearly reflect the translators' different understandings of the connotation of the word and their different political orientations.
The concept of "nation" originated from Western civilization, and after its introduction to China, it will inevitably face many problems in the connection with the tradition of Chinese civilization, and these difficult problems cannot be avoided. When the concept of Western civilization was introduced to China, many times it was first translated into Chinese by foreigners and then used by Chinese. European civilization once occupied a strong position in the cultural exchanges between China and the West in modern times, and this trend may cause some concepts and related discourses to be introduced, and the chinese people will have a certain "path dependence" on the Chinese translation of foreigners. And once these usages become customary, adjusting them will definitely make many people feel uncomfortable. However, China is already a member of the world's international political system, whether it is international diplomatic activities or academic exchanges, we need to refer to the "international universal" discourse system created by European countries and its connotations to communicate in order to maintain national unity and social stability. Therefore, the discursive adjustment of some core concepts may be imperative. What we can do is to harmonize it with the traditional discourse of Chinese civilization as much as possible, and at the same time strive for foreign scholars and politicians to gradually understand the connotation of the Chinese ideological system, so as to carry out more fluent and effective transnational and cross-civilization dialogue and cooperation.
VII. Concluding Remarks
In analyzing the evolution of the state form in modern times, Felix Gross proposed the two corresponding concepts of "citizen state" and "tribal state", which help us analyze China's state system transformation in the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China. "The civil state is a union of free citizens, so that all eligible inhabitants living in the same territory, regardless of their origin, religion, ethnicity or cultural background, are members of the state" (Gross, 1998: xi). "The civil state is founded on political bonds and resorts to political bonds, and its core system is citizenship" (Gross, 2003: 26). In contrast, the traditional social overtones of "the tribal state tends to conflate religion, ethnicity, and political systems into a single principle and attribute, and is therefore a highly exclusive system that is incompatible with equal rights and even intolerant of minorities" (Gross, 1998: xi). "Tribal states associate political identity with racial origin and racial identity. In a modern pluralistic state, political ties and identities are clearly separated from ethnic ties", "The nationalist tribal state is a political belief and institution that is in a protracted conflict with the fundamental human and political rights of modern society" (Gross, 2003: 26, 37).
From the perspective of model classification, Gross's "citizen state" is equivalent to Smith's "citizen's 'national' model", while "tribal state" is equivalent to Smith's "ethnic 'national' model". As a result of the development of capitalist elements, the Western European countries produced the Enlightenment, germinated the original "citizen 'national' model" and established the first modern "nation-states". The countries of Eastern Europe and Asia, on the other hand, were forced to transform from the traditional "tribal state" to the "nation-state" system due to the external forces of the aggression of Western European countries. After the Opium War, the Qing Dynasty was forced to embark on this path of transformation. Due to the historical inertia of the social and cultural structure within the state, the original "tribal state" can easily be transformed into a secondary state based on the "ethnic 'national' model". However, from the perspective of the development history and modernization process of all countries in the world, the passively produced "ethnic 'national' model" in Asia, Africa and Latin America will gradually transition to the "citizen's 'national' model" in the process of globalization, and people's sense of group identity will undergo a fundamental change, and this process is also a necessary historical link in the transition from the traditional "tribal state" to the modern "citizen state", and this direction of evolution is probably the general trend of historical development.
At the same time, it should be noted that in those large countries with large populations and many ethnic groups, such as China, there may be imbalances and dissynchronizations in the social basis and development speed of historical evolution between various regions within the country. Thus, before this process is finally completed, contradictions will surely arise between societies that already have a holistic political framework (central government, constitution, national judicial system, etc.) in the basic form of the modern "nation state", and certain groups that still maintain a traditional "tribal collective" consciousness. Since the Opium War, China's coastal cities, which have come into contact with modern industry and commerce and the school system, and the western region, which has long been relatively isolated and maintained traditional agricultural and animal husbandry social organizations, there must be a certain gap in terms of economic development forms, grass-roots social organizations, religious and cultural concepts, and the integration between them must also be a process of gradual mutual understanding and elimination of estrangement in long-term interaction. Before the remnants of the traditional "tribal collective" in the marginal areas of the country completely disappear, the central government must, in accordance with the specific national conditions and the scientific attitude of "seeking truth from facts", design and formulate the necessary institutional arrangements for different regions and different ethnic groups in order to coordinate the various social and cultural contradictions related to this, persist in opposing the narrow ideological trend of "Han chauvinism" among some people for a long time, and strive to promote the smooth completion of this integration transition period in a gradual and cooperative manner.
Mr. Ge Zhaoguang believes that "having a border means having a clear territory, and having an other constitutes a nation-state that constitutes international relations, and since the Song Dynasty, China has ,...... "At the time of the Song and Yuan Dynasties, the emergence of the 'remnant' group among intellectuals and the formation of the consciousness of 'Taoism' reflected in a sense the identity consciousness of the 'nation-state'" (Ge Zhaoguang, 2011: 25, 62). The "nation-state" as he understood it should still be the "tribal state" that Gross discussed. Although the latter also possessed the conditions of "defining territory" and presenting some kind of reciprocal "international relations" with neighboring regimes in the form of "covenants", the "civil state" associated with citizenship and republican institutions in modern Europe was essentially two completely different types of political entities. The political basis of a true "nation state" can only be what Anthony Smith defines as "citizen nationalism." Therefore, we must be particularly careful when introducing Western concepts and discourses into the study of Chinese history.
[Note] The article was originally published in Social Science Front, No. 3, 2019.
Editor-in-charge: Li Jing
![The Fate of the Old Empire: Is America In the Predicament of My Great Qing?[fig]]()