CCP Style Nationalism Meets New Zealand Democracy, Hillarity Ensues. . .
As the United States races to the polls in an increasingly sleazy and bizarre electoral race, New Zealand is jogging more sedately towards its own election. While sifting the election related news I came across this interesting little snippet on Chinese voters.
The article is written by Lincoln Tan, a New Zealand journalist originally from Singapore who takes a particular interest in Chinese community and immigrant issues. Mr. Tan identified a distinct difference between the voting patterns of Chinese immigrants to New Zealand originating from the People’s Republic of China and those originating from elsewhere.
“The Herald spoke to 32 Chinese voters ahead of a Chinese candidates’ political debate, to be televised live on Chinese TV this Saturday, and 13 out of 20 who originally came from mainland China list “loyalty to China” as most important.
This is the distinct difference between Chinese voters who were originally from China, and the others, who wanted a member who will be able to stand up against racism and discrimination.”
Smart readers will be thinking: “Ah, but what exactly do they mean by ‘loyalty to China’?” It can’t possibly be what it sounds! Perhaps they really just mean “looking after the interests of the Chinese community in New Zealand” or something?
Sadly no. Later down the same page we get clarification:
“The secretary of the United Chinese Associations of New Zealand, Jim He, said this line of thinking among mainland Chinese voters is a result of the country’s historical past.
“When China was weak nobody took notice of us, but now that China is strong, governments and people everywhere want a part of it. So, of course, the expectation of a Chinese MP here from the community is that he or she also supports the Chinese Government,” he said.”
Setting aside the self-pitying and faintly xenophobic tone (i.e. obligatory reference to Chinese ‘humiliation’ and blaming of foreigners for Chinese bigotry) and bizarre logic (i.e. increased foreign interest in China requires ethnic Chinese parliamentary representatives overseas to support the Chinese government), the key point to emerge is that “loyalty to China” equates to “supporting the Chinese government” for Chinese (i.e. PRC) voters in the upcoming New Zealand election.
What to make of that?
I see something odd going on when voters in a democratic nation see loyalty to an authoritarian, anti-democratic foreign government as the single most desirable trait their elected representatives can possess. For voters who feel this way, might the moral course not be to abstain from voting? Such voters seem to have subordinated their interest in New Zealand to their interest in China, declaring their primary interest in New Zealand as being the promotion of Chinese government interests there. Loyalty to New Zealand seems absent from their world view. Perhaps they see the right to vote as too valuable a privilege to waste, but by voting in New Zealand to support the anti-democratic CCP are they not supporting the denial of voting rights to their countrymen back in China?
I don’t pretend to have the answers to these questions. They just strike me as interesting.
Interviews with voters from China further clarified their views. In discussing Shanghai-born Pansy Wong, currently New Zealand’s only Chinese MP, a voter had this to say:
“Pansy Wong grew up in Hong Kong and came to New Zealand too long ago, so I don’t think she understands the new China,” said retail assistant Zhang Hui, 28, from Beijing. “Pansy did not attend a pro-Beijing Olympic rally at Aotea Square in April and that is a sign that she is not loyal to China, and that’s also why I am not giving her my support.”
This comment is interesting. The pro-Beijing Olympic rally in Aotea Square was an ugly nationalistic protest at which myself and various others were assaulted. Hostility was running so high that an organizer told me to leave because the event was “not safe for New Zealanders”. The Chinese voter above appears not merely to support the import of hostile Chinese nationalism into New Zealand, but also to demand that Chinese parliamentarians in New Zealand act as cheerleaders.
A less outrageous quote from another Chinese voter follows:
Property manager Iris Yu, 33, of Belmont, said: “New Zealand is our second home, but China is where our roots are, so of course if someone wants to represent us, then the person has to be from there.”
Thankfully Iris Yu does not explicitly demand that New Zealand parliamentarians be loyal to the Chinese Communist Party. However, New Zealand is clearly subordinate to China in her world view. Not only is New Zealand merely her “second home”, but the primary qualification she seeks in a parliamentary representative is that they be from China. Parochial nationalism rules at the expense of issues.
Really, what can you do but laugh? Thank God plenty of Chinese in New Zealand are not from the People’s Republic of China, and not every Chinese New Zealander from the People’s Republic of China is a rabid nationalist.
The thousands of Chinese nationalists now living in New Zealand talk and act like nutters. Better pray they either return to China or raise children less bigoted and nationalistic than themselves. Hopefully their children will see New Zealand local and national issues as more important than serving the Chinese Communist Party.
October 12th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
How can a pathetic population of only 4 million have a right to choose their own Government and have a voice in how their hard earned taxes are spent. Our big brother should appoint a governor to rule over us and we should submit our will to the great Motherland, as we are just a little sister and have gone a little wayward in our pursuit as a modern democracy.
Our ethnic big brother should rule for us, they are one of us, we are them, we have the same history and sure we could twist history to show how we were always One country, One people. The United States of America is the modern New World and we belong to the modern New World, so why bother with this charade of democracy and having an election, when George Bush or the ruling Republican party should just appoint a governor to rule over us as we are just basically a little sister who as gone astray, and rebelling territory, when we could just be One Country, One People and live in Harmony; instead of playing around pretending to be a modern democracy.
October 12th, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Thanks, very interesting read as ever. Quite a depressing situation.
As a general feeling I´m getting here about the election – I think it´s fair to say people could get a little bit more interested (and I´m trying to encourage myself here too)
I too find it interesting that we are having our elections at the same time as the Americans. Most people I know are talking about Sarah Palin and Barack Obama though, not errr Bill English and Helen Clark…
There was also a worrying survey in The Dominion about how hardly anybody in the 18-24 year old age bracket recognised a picture of John Key! Good for Labour, well no, as, a Victoria University student leader called for people not to vote as voting was pointless and no individual could have an effect on the result! Idiot.
Seems our friends from Cathy are not the only nutters in this country;)
October 13th, 2008 at 6:05 am
I haven’t been following too closely but National and Labor seem very similar in their policies this time round.
It’s starting to look like Labor could pull it out of the hat against expectations though.
Maybe one reason for people’s apathy is that many of the big issues are external to the country these days – things like pollution, energy supply, global warming. Neither party has a very cohesive policy for these things, but even if they did you have to wonder if their policy could make much difference. Too much depends on what other countries do.
October 14th, 2008 at 4:20 am
Seamus, I see your point, but I think you’re focussing on the extreme end of the range. Understandable considering your experiences, but still extreme.
First of all, the sample: 32 is not statistically significant. And 20 of those from the Mainland? Even less so. But even if we are to take this as representative, 13 out of 20 equals 65%. A majority, for sure, but not a huge one. Well, in terms of parliamentary elections, collossal, but otherwise, not much. One could easily claim that 65% of Kiwis like watching rugby, and yet on any given Saturday you could easily find people not watching rugby. Unless you’re in Dunedin on the day of a big match. Never have I seen a city centre so deserted.
Secondly: Methodology. Basically, we don’t know. The best we can assume is that this was an informal survey by a journalist. This raises many more questions: Did he ask exactly the same question of every subject? Was each subject interviewed in roughly similar circumstances? I could probably continue if I were a statistician, but… What, really, does it mean when they talk about “loyalty to China”? Assuming they all mean neo-Nazi style my country right or wrong loyalty, then yes, we’re in the poo. Personal experience on the streets and in the classrooms of Beijing- not to mention the fact neither my wife nor any of my in-laws has beaten me even halfway close to mildly sore, let alone senseless, for being an evil laowai- suggests that such people are a minority and most likely to express the more extreme of their views in situations in which they feel “safe” or “supported”. One drunk alone is probably not going to pick a fight. A drunken young man in a crowd of his buddies is far more likely to try and prove just how tough he is. Same thing applies to sober crowds.
Next you leap from extremely dodgy survey results to statements devoid of any real context in the article:
“When China was weak nobody took notice of us, but now that China is strong, governments and people everywhere want a part of it. So, of course, the expectation of a Chinese MP here from the community is that he or she also supports the Chinese Government,†he said.â€
Aha. And what did Jim say around that comment? What, precisely, does he mean by ‘supports the Chinese Government’? Really! How are we supposed to interpret this? Hyper-nationalism is one interpretation, but there are others. I myself am generally supportive of the Chinese government, especially the Hu-Wen administration, because, although I disagree with the many things done wrong in China, I see the many positive effects of their policies. I mean, only a year ago my parents in law acquired some semblance of a flush toilet for the first time in their 50-odd years, and that was a direct result of government policy. It seems like such a little thing, but it is one [ahem] elemental example of how the Chinese government is doing a lot of good for its people.
Don’t worry, I don’t get to vote. I’ve been overseas for more than three years, and therefore even though I am a New Zealand citizen by right of birth (and parents’ and grandparents’ birth), I am denied the right to vote.
And yes, I do think modern Chinese takes on patriotism and nationalism are directly linked to modern Chinese history. This is only natural, and it can be seen in any country. During the six weeks I spent in Norway, I met not one single person who had anything even halfway positive to say about Germany or Germans, unless they were talking about one or two specific Krauts they had personally got to know, and those they insisted were the special cases. But if you want to hear Norwegians get really nasty, say something positive about Sweden. China ain’t no different. Nor is New Zealand.
Or to elucidate my point of view in an entirely different way: Watch my wife watch TV. She loves stuff set in the 70s and 80s, even the 60s. She is well aware of all the shit that went down in China in that period. She is very aware that her own mother was essentially denied even primary school education because she had an uncle in the Eighth Route Army, and that her father spent the Cultural Revolution teaching city kids how to farm. Ask her about the events of 89, you’ll be shocked by what she remembers, considering she was 7 years old at the time and living in a village in the mountains northwest of Beijing. Ask her about the current situation and you sure as shit won’t get blind loyalty. Ask her about the fucktards who attacked the torch relay in London and Paris and you’ll get a pretty damn sharp response (before you ask, remember that I saw this woman put the fear of God into 10 Chinese cops inside a police station). A sample of one is far, far from statistically significant, but I do see my wife- and my students, for that matter- as being far more representative of ‘Modern Chinese Youth’ than the extreme hypernationalists you are (rightly) worried about.
And therefore I am not even remotely concerned by anything reported in Lincoln Tan’s article.
As for the popularity of various Chinese candidates: Well, I can easily see how Pansy Wong may be less popular among young recent immigrants from the Mainland. Somebody born in Shanghai and raised in Hong Kong is most likely Old. And she obviously grew up in a completely different social and political context from the post-80s Mainland generation. Really, how could she represent the interests of young recent Mainland immigrants? What, if anything, does she understand of the issues they face? Might as well have a Pom of the same age stand in her place. Those interviewed by Lincoln Tan, judging by the very little information that can be gleaned from that article, are naturally going to choose those closest to them: Those raised in the Mainland and recently arrived from Mainland, most likely Northern China.
Can one reasonably expect anything else?
Now, as for my rather specious comparison with Kiwi expats in China: No, I don’t see a difference. I have had the displeasure of dealing with the Kiwi equivalent of the hyper-nationalists you dealt with. They didn’t get violent with me, because I look like them, and they couldn’t really cause any trouble, being one versus one point three billion, but they were just as obnoxious, and just as destined to return to the warm embrace of the motherland as soon as possible. But most Kiwis I have dealt with here in China have been much more mild in outlook and much more embracing of the host country and culture, and yet just as fiercely loyal to their roots. Now, I don’t know much about expat Chinese in NZ, but my experience suggests they ain’t much different from expat Kiwis in China. I may well be wrong.
Or to put it this way: I arrived in China six months after the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. I was here right through the spy-plane incident. And SARS. And the March riots in Tibet. And the earthquake (perfectly safe and completely unshaken-physically speaking- in Beijing, of course). Not once have I felt physically threatened. Well, a couple of people have tried a couple of mildly intimidating things, but in every case I’ve stared them down- and very easily, too- or ignored them. Nothing has ever come even close to blows. I can understand how some young
Chinese in NZ would have turned all neo-Nazi hyper-nationalist, having seen the equal-but-opposite reaction among expats here in China, but I can’t see the inane, childish rantings of such people being as in any way representative of their community.
In other words, I think you’ve read far too much in to Lincoln Tan’s typically (for the NZ media, no offense intended to Lincoln) mediocre report.
And the number of simple spelling mistakes I’m catching myself with… if this comment doesn’t make sense, please forgive me. I’m writing this at the end of an essay-marking marathon.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Thanks for the comments Chris.
I don’t see any equivalency between what I saw in Aotea square and anything I have seen the New Zealand community in China do.
NZers getting drunk, obnoxious and racist while watching a rugby game in Beijing is the equivalent of Chinese getting drunk, obnoxious and racist in a KTV in New Zealand. It is not the equivalent of organizing nationalistic, xenophobic and violent political rallies on foreign soil, then demanding local politicians play cheerleader to your excesses.
I admit I am focusing on the extreme. Mind you, Chinese nationalists are extreme, and they appear to be getting worse.
I agree the CCP does some good things. Mind you, those good things look good partly because of all the bad things they did before. If you starve your population, get students chucking people out windows rather than learning, vandalize your cultural heritage, shoot or imprison your dissidents, and make egotistical irrelevancies like the ‘three represents’ compulsory education, then people will be chuffed to reach the finish line alive and in possession of a flash new toilet. So yes, the CCP deserve some credit. Not very much though. Their biggest achievement has been stopping doing what they started out doing.
Having lived in Taiwan and China, and had a lot of Japanese friends while in China, perhaps I am too inclined to focus on the negative. While in China I got constantly badgered about Taiwan (and sometimes Japan), with most of the people doing the badgering being bigots who fully supported war to force Taiwanese to accept CCP rule, looked forward to future wars with Japan, and so on. I find these attitudes unacceptable. In contrast Taiwanese and Japanese have never sought to browbeat me politically about anything.
Perhaps it comes down to how you feel about the movie Hero? OK, it’s a beautiful film in places. However, the moral of the story is repugnant to me. It basically says that the individual must sacrifice themselves for the whole, authority must be obeyed simply by virtue of being authority, and the manifest destiny of the nation trumps all else. Something along those lines anyway. Hero strikes me as a big cheer-fest for Legalism, a philosophy I dislike. Perhaps there is also some Confucianism in there as well.
Perhaps Chinese voters in New Zealand seeing expressing loyalty to the CCP as the best thing they can do with their vote could also be considered Legalistic? Perhaps Confucian? Perhaps they are just brainwashed? I don’t know.
Incidentally, the other side of the desire to be loyal to China is fear of being perceived as disloyal. This can also lead people to act in an extremely ignoble manner. For example, the cameraman who had footage of the assault on me and promised to assist in identifying those involved later reneged on his promise. His rationale was that the Sichuan Earthquake made it in appropriate for him to do something that might be perceived as ‘against China’. ‘China’ had been struck by malevolent forces and needed to be cosseted. ‘Furthering the interests of China’ dominates thinking to the point where more universal morality and decency get tossed out the window. When I see Chinese people behaving in this way I get pessimistic.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Wasn’t Hero the film where the Emperor explains near the end that he massacred the people because he loved them – but he had to “for the benefit of the future nation”? Some Chinese said the true meaning of this was ‘lost in translation’, though the meaning seemed quite plain to me.
January 16th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
What exactly was “sleazy and bizarre” about the 2008 US election? We elected our first African-American President. I proudly voted for Barack Obama. Has New Zealand ever elected a Maori Prime Minister? You must hate the fact that Bush is gone. The time when Europeans, Australians and others could automatically feel morally superior to the United States has passed.
January 16th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
What exactly was “sleazy and bizarre” about the 2008 US election? Err, Palin and Mc’Cain’s antics for starters?
I’m pleased you proudly voted for Obama.
Are you disappointed that Obama has left most of Bush’s policies in place? You still have a government that authorizes the use of torture (though only of ‘bad guys’ – lol) and protects torturers, goes into Muslim countries and murders civilians, etc.
Do the warm and fuzzy feelings you get from Obama’s skin color outweigh any negative feelings you get from his Bush-like policies?
Does sympathy for Muslims seeing family members blown up as a result of this (near decade-long war) ‘war on terror’ enter into the equation at all for you?