Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests 128 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 20. Liezi,1"Tianrui."Thisistheonlywu nengfragmentinthewholebook.SeealsoA.C. Graham,The Book of Lieh-tzu,p.20. 21. Lunyu,14.28.SeealsoD.C.Lau,The Analects(London:PenguinBooks,1988),p.128. 22. Inthosedaysthebookcost0.34yuan. Ho-fungHung. Protest with Chinese Characteristics: Demonstrations, Riots and Petitions in the Mid-Qing Dynasty. NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity Press,2011.288pp.Hardcover$50.00.isbn978-0-231-15202-0. ThistitlealreadyhaswontheSocialScienceHistoryAssociation'sPresident's Awardfor2010.Theawardisgiventoafirstpublishedwork,andthisbookdisplayscarefulsocialscienceresearchandbroadinterpretativescope.Ho-fungHung hasextractedfromtheQingdynasty'sVeritableRecords(Qing shilu)morethan 950casesofpopularprotestsagainsttheQinggovernmentinthehundredyears from1740to1839.HehassupplementedthismaterialwithworkintheFirst HistoricalArchivesinBeijingandthePalaceMuseuminTaiwanaswellascareful readingofsecondarymaterials. ThecenturyunderinvestigationcoversmostoftheQianlongemperor'sreign (1736­1796)andthereignsofhissuccessors:hisson,theJiaqingemperor(1796­ 1820),andgrandson,theDaoguangemperor(1821­1851).ThenHo-fungHung breaksdownhisdataintothreeshortertimeperiodsoftwentyyearseachand drawsconclusionsaboutthedifferentpatternsofprotesthefinds.Heusesestablishedcategoriesfromothersocialsciencescholarsofprotest,particularlyCharles Tilly,toclassifythisdata.Tosupplementhisstatisticalanalysis,Hungadds detaileddescriptionsofseveralincidentsfromeachsubperiod. Hungfindsshiftingpatternsofprotestinthreetwenty-yearsubperiodsand devotesmorethanhalfofthisworktodiscussingthesedifferences.Thefirst subperiod,from1740to1759,comesduringtheearlyyearsoftheQianlongemperor'slongreign.Itwasmarkedbygeneralprosperityandaggressivestateexpansion, includingthepacificationofthefarwesternregionsofMongoliaandtheestablishmentofXinjiang(newterritory).Hungisnotconcernedwiththisexpansion,but ratherdealswithprotestswithintheChineseheartlandoftheQingempire.He characterizestheprotestsfromthisperiodas"filial-loyaldemonstrations"(p.68), © 2012 by University of Hawai`i Press Features 129 inwhichChineseprotestersacceptedtheQingmandatetoruleandsoughtto bringaboutchangesbyimpressingtheemperorwiththeirloyaltyandfilialdevotion.Manyprotestsfromthiseratookapeacefulformandshowedrespecttoward officialsasparentalfigures.Demonstrationsincludedkneelinginworshipful posturesbeforemagistrates. Thesecondsubperiodrunsfrom1776to1795,duringthelastdecadesofthe Qianlongemperor'sreign,whenhisManchuprotégé,Heshen,dominatedthe government.Intheseyears,theelderlyemperorexercisedlaxcontrolandtolerated corruptionatalllevelsofgovernment,ledbyHeshen'sownavariciousbehavior. Hungfindsthatundertheseconditions,protestorsbecamedefianttowardboththe emperorandhisofficials.Nolongerrespectful,theprotesterstookforcefulaction, includingopenrebellion.TheWhiteLotusRebellion(1796­1805)wastheculminationofthisperiod.Helabelsthisasatimewhen"riots[turned]intorebellion" (p.102). Thefinalsubperiod,from1820to1839,comesinatimeknownastheDaoguangDepression,markedbyfinancialandmonetaryinstabilityoftheQing empire,resultingfromdecliningtaxrevenues,silveroutflowtopurchaseopium imports,andthebreakdownoftheGrandCanalgrainshipments.Thesemadeup themostobviousexamplesoffailingstatepolicies.Hungseesthisperiodasanera of"resistanceandpetitions"(p.135)duringwhichtheQingempire'sChinese subjectsresumedafilialandloyalmannertowardtheemperor,butventedtheir antagonismonlocalofficials.Taxriotsandopenrebelliondeclinedbecauseof generalawarenessofthedecliningcapacitiesoftheQingadministration.Protestorsresumedtheirappealstotheemperor'smercyandsoughthisConfucian responsibilitytohissubjects.Nevertheless,popularresistancetostatepoliciesgrew aseconomicandsocialconditionsworsened. Hung'sstatisticaldatarevealcontinuingformsofprotestsacrossthecentury, andhedrawshisgeneralcharacterizationsforeachtwenty-yearsubperiodfrom increasedpercentagesofcertainkindsofprotestwithineach.WhenHung'sconclusionaboutthecenturyfrom1740to1839iscomparedwiththoseofhisJohn HopkinscolleagueWilliamT.Rowe'sinChina's Last Empire: The Great Qing (Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2009),theyagreeinageneraloutline. YetHunglaysevengreateremphasisonthehighlevelsofprosperity,commercialization,andsocialcomplexityineighteenth-centuryChina,aswellasseeingan earlyonsetofweaknessduringtheQianlongreign,whichistiedtotheemperor's personalconducttowardhistwoempressesaswellashisunquestioningdevotion tohisgrandfather'spolicies.InHung'sview,thesecausedtheQianlongemperorto ignoredealingwiththechangingcircumstancesoftheempire.Hisgrandfather,the Kangxiemperor(r.1661­1722),hadadoptedpoliciesoffixedtaxationatlowrates andConfucianconcernforthelivelihoodofhissubjects.HungfindsQianlong followedcloselyandseeminglyunquestioninglymanyofhisgrandfather'spolicies. 130 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 HungalsofindsagreaterrevivaloftheleadershipundertheJiaqingemperorthan doesRowe.Ingeneral,Hungofferssharpercharacterizationsofthereignsofthese threeQingemperorsthanRowe. OtherhistoriansdisagreewithHung'scharacterizationofthelastdecadesof Qianlong'srule.WenshengWangin"ProsperityandItsDiscontents:ContextualizingSocialProtestinthelateQianlongReign"(Frontiers in Chinese History6, no. 1[2011],pp.347­369)statesthatacrisiswasinevitablebecauseoftherising Chinesepopulation.WangrejectsthenotionthatQianlongblindlyfollowed Kangxi'spolicies.Rather,hearguesitwasQianlong'seffortstoexpandgovernment controloverpopularreligioussectsthattriggeredsocialprotests,suchasthe WhiteLotusRebellion(1796­1805). Inthefinalchapter,Hunguseshisconclusionsaboutthechangingpatternsof popularprotestinthemid-Qingdynastytochallengetheassumptionofconvergencethatunderliessomuchofmodernizationtheory.Thisisoneoftheoldest andreoccurringdebatesinsocialsciencehistory.Ashistitle"ProtestwithChinese Characteristics"suggests,HungrejectsthepremisethatthehistoryofthenonWesternworldwillconformtothegeneralpatternsobservedinEuropeanand NorthAmericanhistoryinthepost-1800modernera.Hungarguesthatpopular protestinChinadifferssignificantlyfromEuropefromtheeighteenthcenturyto thepresent.HefindsthatscholarsofearlymodernandmodernEuropegenerally havearguedthatpopularprotestshaveasinglepattern,movingfromtraditionalto modernforms.Intraditionalprotests,theparticipantsseektopreservesome establishedpracticesfromwhichtheyhavebenefitted,suchasaccesstograzingor woodlandsorassistanceinfoodshortages.Modernprotestsadvancenewclaimsto naturalorhumanrightsthatexceed,byfar,theirtraditionalprivileges.Intraditionalprotests,localauthoritieswerethemaintargets,whileinmodernprotests, theentiregovernmentalstructurefindsitselfunderchallenge. Ho-fungHungrejectstheoriesofconvergenceasEurocentricandfindsthatin Chinaprotestsfollowacyclicalpatternfirstdescribedbythedistinguishedsocial scientistG.WilliamSkinner.SkinnerarguedthatChinesecommunitiesexperiencedacycleinwhichtheywereopentotheofficialsystemduringperiodsof prosperity,butreturnedtoaclosedorisolatedattitudeduringtimesofdynastic declineanddisorder.Thus,thechangingcharacterofprotestinHung'sthree subperiodsreflectsthepeasantry's"strategicchoiceofactioninthecontextofthe changingcapacitiesofthestate"(p.171).Hungwritesthat,astheQingstate becamelessablegovernwithbenevolenceandincreaseditsexaction,"thestate becamepartoftheproblem[and]tofendoffpredatorylocalgovernmentagents, localcommunitiesinvokedtheircommunalsolidarityintheformoftaxriots, attacksonofficialsandthelike"(p.172). HungassertsthatChineseintellectualandpoliticallifeinthemid-Qing era existedwithoutanyrealconcernfortheissuesof"naturalrights"ofindividu- Features 131 als orthegeneralpopulace.UntiltheseconceptswereintroducedintoChinese life inthelatenineteenthcentury,protestsinChinaretainedtheirdistinctly differentcharacter.Heconcludes,"non-Westernprotestsfollowtheirown rhythms ofchangeandaredelimitedbytheirowntraditionsofclaimsandrepertoires"(p.200). AlthoughHung'sargumentsrestonevidencefromthemid-Qing,hegives somespacetothenatureofprotestinChinasincethemid-nineteenthcentury. As longasChinaremainedfreeoftheWesternconcernwiththeconceptsofrights andcitizenship,HungconcludesthatprotestsretainedtheirdistinctiveChinese characteristics.Throughoutthebook,Hungemphasizesthepolitical-economic causationofprotestssocloselyassociatedwithCharlesTilly,butintroducesbriefly theworkofscholarswhoarguethatdominantculturalpatternsaremoreimportantinshapingprotestinallsocieties.Hungagreeswiththeseideas,forhisinterpretationsrestontheassertionofaspecialChinesepatternofprotestshapedby Neo-Confucianismwithitsemphasisonloyaltyandfilialpiety.Hungbelievesthat followingthemid-nineteenth-centuryOpiumWars,thecombinationofchanges intheChineseeconomyandthedeclineofNeo-Confucianorthodoxyproduced thefatalweakeningoftheQingdynasty.Atthatjuncture,Chinesepoliticsopened tonewideasfromtheWestthatintroducedtheconceptsofthenation-state, citizenship,andrights. Inanepilogue,HungdescribeshowsomefeaturesoftraditionalChinese protestsremaininpresent-daydemonstrations,includinglimitedviolenceatthe locallevelandappealstothesympathyofofficialsandpartyleaders.Hefollows theconclusionsofElizabethPerry,whohasdescribedprotestsinpresent-day Chinaasdirectedatbadofficialsorbadpolicieswithintheprevailingsystem,but neverattemptingtooverturnthepoliticalandeconomicorderitself.Hungagrees withPerrythatsuchprotestsactuallymaystrengthentheexistingpoliticaleconomicorderbyrectifyingitsweaknesses. Hungismostcertainlycorrecttoargueagainsttheideathatmodernization leadsinevitablytothereplicationofthenormsoftheWesternpoliticaleconomy. Obviouslypresent-dayJapanese,Iranian,Peruvian,SouthAfrican,orothernonWesternpoliticalsystemsdonotreplicateexactlytheformsandcontentofEuropeanandNorthAmericanpoliticalsystems.Still,manyWesterngovernments and theirleadersoftenactasifotherpeoplesarejustwaitingtoduplicateall the featuresoftheWest.Thecontradictionremainsthat,whiledifferencessurvive, therealityofconvergenceinthecontemporaryworldwillcontinueto grow. Inthebook,Ho-fungHunghasdeployedstrongevidencetoemphasizethe differencesbetweentheWestandtherestoftheworld.AsWenshengWang's recentarticlesuggests,Hung'scharacterizationsofthesubperiodsofthemid-Qing maynotstanduptofurtherresearch,but,nonetheless,hisevidenceofdiffering 132 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 patternsofprotestinmid-QingChinawillbecomeacorrectivetothosewhoover emphasizetheconvergingandhomogenizingforcesinmodernhistory. DavidD.Buck David D. Buck is a professor emeritus at http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png China Review International University of Hawai'I Press

Finding Distinctive Chinese Characteristics in Qing Era Popular Protests

Buck, David D.
China Review International , Volume 18 (2) – Sep 19, 2011
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/finding-distinctive-chinese-characteristics-in-qing-era-popular-FvuJ4mz9Ie

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-9367
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

128 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 20. Liezi,1"Tianrui."Thisistheonlywu nengfragmentinthewholebook.SeealsoA.C. Graham,The Book of Lieh-tzu,p.20. 21. Lunyu,14.28.SeealsoD.C.Lau,The Analects(London:PenguinBooks,1988),p.128. 22. Inthosedaysthebookcost0.34yuan. Ho-fungHung. Protest with Chinese Characteristics: Demonstrations, Riots and Petitions in the Mid-Qing Dynasty. NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity Press,2011.288pp.Hardcover$50.00.isbn978-0-231-15202-0. ThistitlealreadyhaswontheSocialScienceHistoryAssociation'sPresident's Awardfor2010.Theawardisgiventoafirstpublishedwork,andthisbookdisplayscarefulsocialscienceresearchandbroadinterpretativescope.Ho-fungHung hasextractedfromtheQingdynasty'sVeritableRecords(Qing shilu)morethan 950casesofpopularprotestsagainsttheQinggovernmentinthehundredyears from1740to1839.HehassupplementedthismaterialwithworkintheFirst HistoricalArchivesinBeijingandthePalaceMuseuminTaiwanaswellascareful readingofsecondarymaterials. ThecenturyunderinvestigationcoversmostoftheQianlongemperor'sreign (1736­1796)andthereignsofhissuccessors:hisson,theJiaqingemperor(1796­ 1820),andgrandson,theDaoguangemperor(1821­1851).ThenHo-fungHung breaksdownhisdataintothreeshortertimeperiodsoftwentyyearseachand drawsconclusionsaboutthedifferentpatternsofprotesthefinds.Heusesestablishedcategoriesfromothersocialsciencescholarsofprotest,particularlyCharles Tilly,toclassifythisdata.Tosupplementhisstatisticalanalysis,Hungadds detaileddescriptionsofseveralincidentsfromeachsubperiod. Hungfindsshiftingpatternsofprotestinthreetwenty-yearsubperiodsand devotesmorethanhalfofthisworktodiscussingthesedifferences.Thefirst subperiod,from1740to1759,comesduringtheearlyyearsoftheQianlongemperor'slongreign.Itwasmarkedbygeneralprosperityandaggressivestateexpansion, includingthepacificationofthefarwesternregionsofMongoliaandtheestablishmentofXinjiang(newterritory).Hungisnotconcernedwiththisexpansion,but ratherdealswithprotestswithintheChineseheartlandoftheQingempire.He characterizestheprotestsfromthisperiodas"filial-loyaldemonstrations"(p.68), © 2012 by University of Hawai`i Press Features 129 inwhichChineseprotestersacceptedtheQingmandatetoruleandsoughtto bringaboutchangesbyimpressingtheemperorwiththeirloyaltyandfilialdevotion.Manyprotestsfromthiseratookapeacefulformandshowedrespecttoward officialsasparentalfigures.Demonstrationsincludedkneelinginworshipful posturesbeforemagistrates. Thesecondsubperiodrunsfrom1776to1795,duringthelastdecadesofthe Qianlongemperor'sreign,whenhisManchuprotégé,Heshen,dominatedthe government.Intheseyears,theelderlyemperorexercisedlaxcontrolandtolerated corruptionatalllevelsofgovernment,ledbyHeshen'sownavariciousbehavior. Hungfindsthatundertheseconditions,protestorsbecamedefianttowardboththe emperorandhisofficials.Nolongerrespectful,theprotesterstookforcefulaction, includingopenrebellion.TheWhiteLotusRebellion(1796­1805)wastheculminationofthisperiod.Helabelsthisasatimewhen"riots[turned]intorebellion" (p.102). Thefinalsubperiod,from1820to1839,comesinatimeknownastheDaoguangDepression,markedbyfinancialandmonetaryinstabilityoftheQing empire,resultingfromdecliningtaxrevenues,silveroutflowtopurchaseopium imports,andthebreakdownoftheGrandCanalgrainshipments.Thesemadeup themostobviousexamplesoffailingstatepolicies.Hungseesthisperiodasanera of"resistanceandpetitions"(p.135)duringwhichtheQingempire'sChinese subjectsresumedafilialandloyalmannertowardtheemperor,butventedtheir antagonismonlocalofficials.Taxriotsandopenrebelliondeclinedbecauseof generalawarenessofthedecliningcapacitiesoftheQingadministration.Protestorsresumedtheirappealstotheemperor'smercyandsoughthisConfucian responsibilitytohissubjects.Nevertheless,popularresistancetostatepoliciesgrew aseconomicandsocialconditionsworsened. Hung'sstatisticaldatarevealcontinuingformsofprotestsacrossthecentury, andhedrawshisgeneralcharacterizationsforeachtwenty-yearsubperiodfrom increasedpercentagesofcertainkindsofprotestwithineach.WhenHung'sconclusionaboutthecenturyfrom1740to1839iscomparedwiththoseofhisJohn HopkinscolleagueWilliamT.Rowe'sinChina's Last Empire: The Great Qing (Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2009),theyagreeinageneraloutline. YetHunglaysevengreateremphasisonthehighlevelsofprosperity,commercialization,andsocialcomplexityineighteenth-centuryChina,aswellasseeingan earlyonsetofweaknessduringtheQianlongreign,whichistiedtotheemperor's personalconducttowardhistwoempressesaswellashisunquestioningdevotion tohisgrandfather'spolicies.InHung'sview,thesecausedtheQianlongemperorto ignoredealingwiththechangingcircumstancesoftheempire.Hisgrandfather,the Kangxiemperor(r.1661­1722),hadadoptedpoliciesoffixedtaxationatlowrates andConfucianconcernforthelivelihoodofhissubjects.HungfindsQianlong followedcloselyandseeminglyunquestioninglymanyofhisgrandfather'spolicies. 130 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 HungalsofindsagreaterrevivaloftheleadershipundertheJiaqingemperorthan doesRowe.Ingeneral,Hungofferssharpercharacterizationsofthereignsofthese threeQingemperorsthanRowe. OtherhistoriansdisagreewithHung'scharacterizationofthelastdecadesof Qianlong'srule.WenshengWangin"ProsperityandItsDiscontents:ContextualizingSocialProtestinthelateQianlongReign"(Frontiers in Chinese History6, no. 1[2011],pp.347­369)statesthatacrisiswasinevitablebecauseoftherising Chinesepopulation.WangrejectsthenotionthatQianlongblindlyfollowed Kangxi'spolicies.Rather,hearguesitwasQianlong'seffortstoexpandgovernment controloverpopularreligioussectsthattriggeredsocialprotests,suchasthe WhiteLotusRebellion(1796­1805). Inthefinalchapter,Hunguseshisconclusionsaboutthechangingpatternsof popularprotestinthemid-Qingdynastytochallengetheassumptionofconvergencethatunderliessomuchofmodernizationtheory.Thisisoneoftheoldest andreoccurringdebatesinsocialsciencehistory.Ashistitle"ProtestwithChinese Characteristics"suggests,HungrejectsthepremisethatthehistoryofthenonWesternworldwillconformtothegeneralpatternsobservedinEuropeanand NorthAmericanhistoryinthepost-1800modernera.Hungarguesthatpopular protestinChinadifferssignificantlyfromEuropefromtheeighteenthcenturyto thepresent.HefindsthatscholarsofearlymodernandmodernEuropegenerally havearguedthatpopularprotestshaveasinglepattern,movingfromtraditionalto modernforms.Intraditionalprotests,theparticipantsseektopreservesome establishedpracticesfromwhichtheyhavebenefitted,suchasaccesstograzingor woodlandsorassistanceinfoodshortages.Modernprotestsadvancenewclaimsto naturalorhumanrightsthatexceed,byfar,theirtraditionalprivileges.Intraditionalprotests,localauthoritieswerethemaintargets,whileinmodernprotests, theentiregovernmentalstructurefindsitselfunderchallenge. Ho-fungHungrejectstheoriesofconvergenceasEurocentricandfindsthatin Chinaprotestsfollowacyclicalpatternfirstdescribedbythedistinguishedsocial scientistG.WilliamSkinner.SkinnerarguedthatChinesecommunitiesexperiencedacycleinwhichtheywereopentotheofficialsystemduringperiodsof prosperity,butreturnedtoaclosedorisolatedattitudeduringtimesofdynastic declineanddisorder.Thus,thechangingcharacterofprotestinHung'sthree subperiodsreflectsthepeasantry's"strategicchoiceofactioninthecontextofthe changingcapacitiesofthestate"(p.171).Hungwritesthat,astheQingstate becamelessablegovernwithbenevolenceandincreaseditsexaction,"thestate becamepartoftheproblem[and]tofendoffpredatorylocalgovernmentagents, localcommunitiesinvokedtheircommunalsolidarityintheformoftaxriots, attacksonofficialsandthelike"(p.172). HungassertsthatChineseintellectualandpoliticallifeinthemid-Qing era existedwithoutanyrealconcernfortheissuesof"naturalrights"ofindividu- Features 131 als orthegeneralpopulace.UntiltheseconceptswereintroducedintoChinese life inthelatenineteenthcentury,protestsinChinaretainedtheirdistinctly differentcharacter.Heconcludes,"non-Westernprotestsfollowtheirown rhythms ofchangeandaredelimitedbytheirowntraditionsofclaimsandrepertoires"(p.200). AlthoughHung'sargumentsrestonevidencefromthemid-Qing,hegives somespacetothenatureofprotestinChinasincethemid-nineteenthcentury. As longasChinaremainedfreeoftheWesternconcernwiththeconceptsofrights andcitizenship,HungconcludesthatprotestsretainedtheirdistinctiveChinese characteristics.Throughoutthebook,Hungemphasizesthepolitical-economic causationofprotestssocloselyassociatedwithCharlesTilly,butintroducesbriefly theworkofscholarswhoarguethatdominantculturalpatternsaremoreimportantinshapingprotestinallsocieties.Hungagreeswiththeseideas,forhisinterpretationsrestontheassertionofaspecialChinesepatternofprotestshapedby Neo-Confucianismwithitsemphasisonloyaltyandfilialpiety.Hungbelievesthat followingthemid-nineteenth-centuryOpiumWars,thecombinationofchanges intheChineseeconomyandthedeclineofNeo-Confucianorthodoxyproduced thefatalweakeningoftheQingdynasty.Atthatjuncture,Chinesepoliticsopened tonewideasfromtheWestthatintroducedtheconceptsofthenation-state, citizenship,andrights. Inanepilogue,HungdescribeshowsomefeaturesoftraditionalChinese protestsremaininpresent-daydemonstrations,includinglimitedviolenceatthe locallevelandappealstothesympathyofofficialsandpartyleaders.Hefollows theconclusionsofElizabethPerry,whohasdescribedprotestsinpresent-day Chinaasdirectedatbadofficialsorbadpolicieswithintheprevailingsystem,but neverattemptingtooverturnthepoliticalandeconomicorderitself.Hungagrees withPerrythatsuchprotestsactuallymaystrengthentheexistingpoliticaleconomicorderbyrectifyingitsweaknesses. Hungismostcertainlycorrecttoargueagainsttheideathatmodernization leadsinevitablytothereplicationofthenormsoftheWesternpoliticaleconomy. Obviouslypresent-dayJapanese,Iranian,Peruvian,SouthAfrican,orothernonWesternpoliticalsystemsdonotreplicateexactlytheformsandcontentofEuropeanandNorthAmericanpoliticalsystems.Still,manyWesterngovernments and theirleadersoftenactasifotherpeoplesarejustwaitingtoduplicateall the featuresoftheWest.Thecontradictionremainsthat,whiledifferencessurvive, therealityofconvergenceinthecontemporaryworldwillcontinueto grow. Inthebook,Ho-fungHunghasdeployedstrongevidencetoemphasizethe differencesbetweentheWestandtherestoftheworld.AsWenshengWang's recentarticlesuggests,Hung'scharacterizationsofthesubperiodsofthemid-Qing maynotstanduptofurtherresearch,but,nonetheless,hisevidenceofdiffering 132 ChinaReviewInternational:Vol.18,No.2,2011 patternsofprotestinmid-QingChinawillbecomeacorrectivetothosewhoover emphasizetheconvergingandhomogenizingforcesinmodernhistory. DavidD.Buck David D. Buck is a professor emeritus at

Journal

China Review International – University of Hawai'I Press

Published: Sep 19, 2011

There are no references for this article.