Two Approaches to National Humiliation：Gries’ Masses China V.S. Callahan’s Party-State China

• Main Authors: Yu-Hsin Cheng, 鄭宇馨
• Other Authors: Chih-Yu Shih
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2012
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/55690087613504897887

碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 政治學研究所 === 100 === The one hundred years of history dating from the First Opium War of 1840 to the founding of the People''s Republic of China in 1949 are known as the "Century of Humiliation". The memory of these years of national humiliation has shaped contemporary China’s consciousness and their fundamental views on foreign affairs. When China interacts with the outside world, they associate their past suffering with current events, which leads to a harsh foreign policy, especially towards America and Japan. The main purpose of this thesis is to analyze and discuss two views of China''s National Humiliation in English literature. One view is that China’s national humiliation has a historical and social basis. This view holds that although the sense of humiliation certainly is shaped by the government, it is also practiced by the people. The other view is that the narrative of national humiliation is a means of political mobilization and propaganda. The former, espoused by Dr. Peter Hays Gries, argues that the sense of national humiliation has been formed in a bottom–up manner, beginning with the masses, while the latter, championed by authors like Dr. William A. Callahan, argues that it has developed via a top-down approach, shaped entirely by the state. I use Dr. Anthony Giddens''s concepts of “agent” and “agency” to answer the following questions: How would the two most important agents, the “state/ party-state/ government” and the “masses”, be controlled and influenced by the consciousness of national humiliation? What are their roles in the narrative of national humiliation? Because of his experience living in China, Gries has a deep understanding of the Chinese people’s emotions. Therefore, he highly praises the role of the masses in shaping the national consciousness, while he considers the state’s role to be empty and insufficient. He believes that the people’s opinions affect China''s foreign policy. Callahan, in contrast, deconstructs China''s party-state system, and points out that the party-state system uses the narrative of national humiliation to shape China''s pessoptimism. In conclusion, he argues that the sense of national humiliation becomes a cultural hegemony, confining China''s people and their government.