The antidote for China’s violent turn

With a police shooting in Hong Kong and a parade in Beijing of offensive weapons, China needs a return to its ancient ideas about power and pluralism.

AP
Balloons float past a Chinese flag in Beijing during the Oct. 1 parade commemorating the 70th anniversary of the founding of Communist China, and a pro-democracy protester's umbrella lies on the ground in Hong Kong after a clash with police.

China marked 70 years of Communist Party rule on Tuesday with quite a display of state firepower. The focus was supposed to be a parade in Beijing that showcased to the world, for the first time, military weapons designed for offensive strikes. Instead, the world was focused more on Hong Kong. There, for the first time, police took a violent turn and shot a demonstrator as tens of thousands marched for freedom and democracy.

China had indeed warned the protesters of the “immense strength of the central government.” In fact, during the parade in Beijing, one guest of honor was Lau Chak-kei, a Hong Kong police sergeant who was photographed carrying a shotgun during a protest in July. He is touted as a Chinese hero.

From shotguns to new hypersonic missiles, China has decided to show that its state power rests mainly on its firepower. This is quite a shift from seeking other forms of legitimacy, such as increased prosperity. It hints at a party fearful of losing support, both at home and abroad, to maintain its sole right to rule. To its credit, China has not used violent force outside its borders since 1988, when it provoked a confrontation with Vietnam. For three decades its leaders have focused on adopting a semi-free market economy. Yet both the escalation of official violence in Hong Kong and the parade of offensive weapons reveal a new intolerant and raw assertiveness.

Some scholars within China have warned against a kind of statism that relies on violence. Even the father of post-imperial China, Sun Yat-sen, warned China not to develop “the cult of force” with weapons as the country’s outstanding feature. One Chinese historian, Xu Jilin, writes that China “has seen an unprecedented resurgence in nationalism and statism, with the potential for military conflicts to erupt at the drop of a hat.”

Mr. Xu suggests the party return to an ancient Chinese idea of tianxia, or a restraint on the powerful through the use of concepts such as equality in the treatment of others and a pluralism that tolerates social and ethnic differences. Such concepts have spiritual power, he states, at a time when “the noble spiritual basis of the past is gone.”

“China’s rise has made neighboring countries uneasy,” he wrote in a 2018 book. “They fear that the soul of the Chinese empire will be reborn in a different body.” He points to Europe’s attempt after the nationalist wars of the 20th century to create a union of states based on universal values. Such an “external order” of values exists beyond the sovereignty of the nation-state. It also exists beyond the power of weapons and helps define how a society should exist in peace.

This is the message that Hong Kong, along with Taiwan and China’s Uyghur minority, are trying to send to Beijing. The answer cannot be guns.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.