College of Asia and The Pacific, The Australian National University Australian National University

College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University
Australian National University
The Nationless State: The Search for a Nation in Modern Chinese Nationalism
Author(s): John Fitzgerald
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs, No. 33 (Jan., 1995), pp. 75-104
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the College of Asia and the Pacific, The
Australian National University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2950089 .
Accessed: 16/02/2013 12:19
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The University of Chicago Press, College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University,
Australian National University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE NATIONLESS STATE:
THE SEARCH FOR A NATION IN MODERN
CHINESE NATIONALISM
JohnFitzgerald
Thesepeopleareso shameless andso quickof handthatat anytimetheycan

proclaimthemselvesrepresentatives orother.
of somegroup LouisXIV said'We
say'WearetheNation'.
aretheState',they
LiangQichao,MayDay,19251
The historyof modemChina,in theround,is recounted as a strugglefor

nationalreunification and liberationtracedthroughthe rise and fall of
successivestate formations in the imperial,early Republican(1912-27),
Nationalist(1928-49)and Communist periods.Whatlendscontinuity to this
historyfromone regimeto the next is the motifof a unitarystate
reconstitutingitselffromthe rubbleof a disintegrating empire.Continuity
derivesas well froman implicitidentification of theunitary statewiththe
nationon whosebehalfthestateis presumed to act: theideal of theunitary
stateis linkedwiththeidea of a nationalpeoplefirstly in thestoryof their
commonstruggleand secondlyin the assumption thatthe one, the state,
'represents'theother,thenation.The nationis presumed to be as continuous
as thehoaryidealoftheunitary recentvintage
stateitselfdespitetherelatively
oftheconceptofthenationin China,despitetheequallyrecentgenesisofthe
idea that the state should representanythingat all, and despite the
I Wuchanjieji yu wuyejieji [The Property-less Class], in Li

Class and theUnemployed
Xinghua(ed.), Liang Qichao xuanji (Shanghai:Shanghai chubanshe,
renmin 1984),
p.853. Emphasisadded.

76 THE AUSTRALIANJOURNALOF CHINESE AFFAIRS
extraordinarily abruptand violentmomentsof transition fromone state

formation tothenext.
Certainly, thedisjuncture betweenstateformations is consistent witha
sequentialhistoryof the regeneration of the state.Particular regimesmay
come and go, butChinais stillChina.The assertion of nationalcontinuity,
however,rests uneasilyalongsidethe distinctiveand oftencompeting
definitions of thenationwhichhavebeenputforward byeach state-building
movement in itsturn.Can thecomposition oftheChinesepeoplechangefrom
one era to thenextand theChinesenationstillbe countedthesamenation?
Put simply,each of the majorstatemovements of the past centuryhas
advocateda distinctive and mutually exclusivedefinition of thenationalself:
Confucianreformersassociated the collective self with a distinctive
civilization, liberalrepublicansconceivedof thenationas a bodyofcitizens,
Nationalist(Kuomintang) revolutionaries thoughtof a Chineserace, and
China's Marxist-Leninists have qualifiedcitizenand race by reference to
socialclass.The uneasyfitbetweentheasserted continuityoftheunitary state
and these sharpdiscontinuities in the definition of the nationraises the
questionI wish to pursuehere.Who or what was the nationto which
constitutional reformers,republicanrevolutionaries, May Fourthactivists and
thetheorists of theNationalist andCommunist partiesall referredwhenthey
resolvedto 'save thecountry'(jiuguo)?By whatprocedures was it defined?
Mostparticularly, was itevermorethana floating referrentofthestate,which
signifiedthenationby 'representing' it?
I proposeto explorethe relationship betweenstateand nationin the
Chineserevolution byintroducing recenttheoretical writings on post-colonial
nationalism, drawingcomparisons withothernation-building movements and
isolatinga number ofcommonelements amongthediscontinuities in national
self-representation in theChinesecase - chiefly theidealoftheunitary state,
the politicalstruggleto give it particular formand associatedattempts to
reconfigure thenationon thepartofthesuccessivestateformations thathave
soughtto represent thenationto itselfandto theworld.My purposeis notto
establishthecontinuity ofnationalist
thought whichis properly
itself, thetask
ofnationalist butto focuson itsdisjunctures,
histories, andto suggestthatthe
appearanceof a continuous historyderivesless fromthepreservation of a
Chinesenationthanfromtheideal of theunitary statewhichtranscends all
stateformations andis madeidenticalwiththeidea ofChinaitself.The state
whichis Chinahas,I believe,no givennation.InsteadtheChinesenationhas
beencreatedandrecreated inthestruggle forstatepower,andithasultimately
beendefined bythestateas a rewardofvictory. Thestate'ssearchfora nation
neednotimplythattherewas no nationoutthere,so to speak,waitingto be
found.It meansonlythatthepeopleencountered bystate-building movements
did notquitematchup to thekindof nationtherevolutionaries werelooking
fortohelpbuildtheirsovereign andunified state.

THE NATIONLESS STATE 77
The NationlessState
The phraseI havechosento denotetheproblem,'nationlessstate',requires
someelaboration. The morefamiliar term,'statelessnation',is grounded in an
assumption thatnationsare out therein the worldstriving to realizetheir
destinyas nation-states, even if only a small proportion ever succeed in
crystallizing aroundstates.ErnestGellnerestimatesthatforeverynation
whichhasestablished itsownstatethereareperhapsninewhoseaspirations to
statehood remain(andwillremain)unrealized.2 Theemphasison theobjective
existenceof thenationimpliedby thetermstatelessnationis nevertheless
compromised by its generalusage. In commonparlance,a nationwhich
cannotboasta statebarelymeritsrecognition at all unlessitsaspirations for
statehoodhappento threaten thestability of itsparentstateor to complicate
relationsamongitsneighbours. It is underthesecircumstances thattheterm
generally makesitsappearance;thatis, whena self-defined nationfightsfor
its independence and sovereignty and places a stableinternational system
underthreat.
The termemployedhere,nationless state,suggestssomething else again.
In the firstplace, it focusesattention on the statein an analysisof the
historicaldevelopment of nationalism, and impliesthatthe nationis an
essentially-contested conceptin a politicaldiscourseconcernedwiththe
assertion of stateunity, sovereignty andindependence withintheinternational
statesystem.3 In thecase of China,as Prasenjit Duarahas pointedout,state-
buildinghas provenquite inseparablefromnation-building.4 The term
nationlessstate impliesan additionalmeasureof scepticismabout the
existenceof a Chinesenationoutsidethestateframework. It asksus to stand
at a criticaldistancefromthe state'sown presumption thatthe nationit
represents is an autonomous entity whichcouldconceivably existin theforms
in whichthestatehaschosentorepresent itbutindependently ofthestate.By
nationless state,in otherwords,I amreferring tothehistorical development of
a stateorproto-state formation whichoperates inthenameofan indeterminate
nationthatthestateitselfidentifies andsummons intobeing.
In theChineserevolution, thestatewas notjustmidwife atthebirthofthe
nationbutin factitssire.So thefounder oftheNationalist Party, SunYat-sen,
is appropriately remembered as the'father of thecountry' (guofu).The state
not only deliveredthe nationintothe worldbut determined whatformit
shouldtake,and nationality (or ethnicity) was onlyone of thefactorswhich
state-builders took intoconsideration. In fact,the stateset out to createa
2 Ernest Gellner,
NationsandNationalism Press,1983),p.45.
University
(Ithaca:Cornell
3 I use theterms concept'
'essentially-contested inthesenseselaborated
and'discourse'
by WilliamConnellyin The Termsof PoliticalDiscourse,second edition(Oxford:
Martin
Robertson,
1983).
4 Powerand theState:RuralNorthChina,1900-1942(Stanford:
PrasenjitDuara,Culture,
Stanford Press,1988),pp.2-4.
University

nationafteritsownlikenessandselectedonlythosenationalattributes (ethnic,
geographic, culturaland social) whichhappenedto suittheattainment and
retentionof stateunity,sovereignty and independence in a worldof nation-
states.Inclusionon equal termsin thisinternational systemwas the final
measureoftheattainment ofnationhood, andhencethenationassumedforms
suitedto theachievement of statehood.The nationwas, in otherwords,a
desideratum ofstate-building, itsforms determined bynothing so muchas the
needforthestateto represent something otherthanitself.It tookshapeas a
correlative
ofthestate,gradually andincrementally, andmirrored theshapeof
theparticular stateformation whichactedto represent it. In employing the
term'nationlessstate',I wishin thefirstinstanceto drawattention to this
processof representation, or nation-defining,
in state-building, and to invite
closerinspectionofthisprocess.
But myaim is notsimplyto describea process.A secondpurposeis to
relocate argumentsabout nationalismand Marxismin anti-imperialist
movements, and more particularly in the Chineserevolution, outsideof
orthodox Marxistand anti-Marxist frameworks of analysis.As we followthe
searchby thepost-colonial statefora nationit can call itsown,we findthat
one ofthemanywaysinwhichthestateconceivesofitsnationalconstituency
is in termsof socialclass. At thispointstate-builderscomeintocontactwith
Marxismand have to deal withit. I shallproposean alternative methodof
analysingthis contactbetweenthe newly emergentstate-formation and
Marxism, centred on theideaoftheclass-nation.
Nationalism,Socialismand NationalLiberationin Comparative

Perspective
Nationaland social revolutionaries
bothseek 'to assertand makegood their
claims to statesovereignty'.5 Since sovereignstatesare, by theirnature,
theclaimto statesovereignty
nation-states, maybe said to makenationalists
of nationaland social revolutionaries
alike.Whatis more,therevolutionary
who struggles forstatesovereignty in thenameof a nationallegedlyunder
threatgenerallyassumesthatthestruggle to liberatethestateis identicalwith
the salvationof the nation.What thendistinguishes the social fromthe
nationalrevolutionary in national-liberation
strugglesis neitherthearenain
whichthestruggle takesplace northetrophy forwhichtheycompete.The
arenais inevitablya nationalone and theprizeis statepower.Rather,what
theone fromtheotheris theidentity
distinguishes of thenationalselfwhich
eachstateformation seekstorepresent inassertingitssovereignty.
Theda Skocpol,Statesand Social Revolutions:A ComparativeAnalysisof France,

Russiaand China(Cambridge:
CambndgeUniversity Press,1979),p.164.

THENATIONLESSSTATE 79
Identifying this nationalself is one of the functionsof nationalist

thought.6Nationalistthought, althoughnothingif not particular,generally
developsalong fairlypredictablelines and the termsin whichnationals
identifyand celebratetheirsingularity aboutthem.
have a banal familiarity
Americans singoftheirfruitedplains,Australianssingof sweeping
their ones.
Much the same applies to the development of nationalistthoughtamong
colonialelites,althoughin thiscase nationalismis channelledintofixedand
relatedproblematics by the elite's confrontation withimperialism.Anti-
colonial nationalismhas been describedas a 'derivativediscourse' of
Orientalism, drawingcloselyuponthestyleofthought in whichthedominant
imperialpowers characterize their'oriental'subjects.But, notes Partha
Chatterjee,
theproblematicinnationalistthought thereverse
is exactly ofthatofOrientalism.
Thatis tosay,the'object'innationalist
thought whoretains
is stilltheOriental, the
character
essentialist depictedinOrientalistdiscourse. non-
Onlyheis notpassive,
which
He is seentopossessa 'subjectivity'
participating. can'make'.7
hehimself
In anti-colonial nationalism, men and womenof colonizedsocieties
assumean activerole in decidingtheirown fate,butwithinan essentialist
styleofthought thatis appropriated fromtheircolonialoppressors.
Nationalistthought developsin associationwiththe struggleforstate
power amongnationalist elites and betweennationalists and the colonial
powers.Chatterjee identifies a number of stagesin thisprogression, or what
he calls 'programmatic phases. .. [each]markedby innovations in political
objectives, in strategy andtactics,in selecting thetypesof issueson whichto
focusits ideologicalsightsand concentrate is polemicalattack'.The term
'programmatic phases'assumesa goal towardwhicheachstageis moving, or
at leasta linealongwhichevolution is takingplace.8The goal of nationalist
thoughtis the creationof a sovereignnationalsubjectwhichparallelsthe
struggle forsovereign statepowertaking placeinthepoliticalfield.
Chatterjeehimselfoffersone model of such evolutionbased on his
readingof Gramsciand Indianhistory. The firstphaseof nationalistthought
seeksto combinethe'superior material qualitiesof Westerncultures withthe
[presumed] spiritual of
qualities the East'. Nationalistthought startsoutas a
defence of a so-called nationaltradition which is to
thought be under threat
fromtheimperialist powersandtheircolonialstate,andyetthedefenceofthis
'tradition'is caughtin a paradoxbetweenalternating impulsesto destroy and
to preservethe traditional. Nationalistthoughtis characteristically self-
contradictory. As Dipesh Chakrabarty has notedof India,the impulseto
6 and theColonialWorld:A DerivativeDiscourse

NationalistThought
ParthaChatterjee,
(London:Zed Books,1986).
7 Ibid.,p.38.
8 Ibid.,pp.42-3.

distinguish betweenthe'national'cultureand thatof theWest'is combined

withan aspiration to modernity thatcan be definedonlyin termsofthepost-
Enlightenment rationalismof Europeanculture'.As a resultof these
contradictory impulses,it is felt at each phase of the development of
nationalist thought thatif imitation goes too farthe identityof the nationwill
be surrendered. By wayof copingwiththiscontradiction, nationalistthought
attempts to define,onceandforall, an ultimate self-referentwhichis beyond
dispute;thatis,itfeelscompelledtodrawa lineindefining thenationbeyond
whichanyconcessionis tantamount to treasonagainstthe'nation'.9The only
constant in thisprocessis theattempt to drawa line,nottheactualplacement
of it: the line whichdefinestheboundary of thenationmovesslowlybut
surely,fromone phaseto thenext,alonga coursecharted through nationalist
debate but propelledby concern for assertingstate sovereigntyand
independence.The line moves further in the directionof the state in
Chatterjee's accountof subsequent stagesof nationalist thought. The second
phase,wellillustrated in thecareerofGandhi,attempts to mobilizepeoplein
the cause of an anti-colonialstrugglewhile distancingthemfromthe
structuresofthestate.Thethird phaseis concerned aboveall with'therational
organization ofpower',exemplified inNehru'sequationofnation, peopleand
state,in particularhis overriding concernto relateall othersocial and
economicissuestothepoliticalgoalofcreating a sovereign '0
state.
The parallelbetweeneach of Chatterjee's phases and the development of
modernChinese nationalism is striking,despite significantdifferencesin the
characterof the statein India and China.The firstof Chatterjee'sphases
recallsthe 'culturalism' of nineteenth-century Chinesereformers, whichis
customarily distinguished fromnationalism inWestern historiography.Indeed,
we generally presume laterdevelopments innationalist thought - specifically
the twentieth-century identification of the nationas the race or the whole
people - to be the definitive formof nationalism. But if we consider
nationalistthought morebroadlyas a seriesofevolvingproblematics withina
single discourse,in the mannerof Chatterjee,then nineteenth-century
culturalism may be reclaimedas a phase of modernnationalism. Even
culturalism is profoundly concernedwiththepreservation of thenation,the
difference lyingin theconception of thenationit seeksto preserve. Moreto
my presentpurpose,thisperspective also freesus fromassumingthatthe
nationas 'race' is the uniqueor finalformof nationalism beyondwhich
nationalist thought cannotproceedwithout turning intosomething else again
something we might perhaps mistake forsocialism.
The secondofChatterjee's phases,associatedwithGandhi'smobilization
of popularresources outsidestatestructures, seemsto havehadno parallelin
9 Dipesh Chakrabarty, 'Towardsa Discourseon Nationalism',Economicand Political

to Chakrabarty
Weekly(Delhi), 11 July1987,p.1137.I am indebted forthemetaphorof
the'movingline'.
10 Nationalist
Chatterjee, p.51.
Thought,

China.Mass resistance wouldhavewaitedinvainfora stablecolonialstatein

Beijing." In anyeventChinahad no Gandhi.The thirdphase,nationalism's
'momentof arrival'underNehru,has muchin commonwiththenationalism
oftheChineseNationalist Party,theKuomintang. Culturaltraditionstillplays
a partin identifyingthenationinthisphasebuta partsubordinated totheidea
of a national'people'. Nehrurecalledin his book,The Discoveryof India
(1945),thatwhenhe touredthecountryside he wouldfrequently be greeted by
criesof 'VictorytoMotherIndia',andwouldturnandaskthecrowd'who[is]
thisBharatMata, MotherIndia,whosevictorytheywanted?My question
would amuse themand surprisethem'.The people were understandably
puzzled,notabouttheobjectbutaboutthesubjectof theirquestfornational
emancipation. Who or whatwas India?Nehruwouldthenset themat ease,
pointingout that'whatcountedultimately werethepeopleof India,people
likethemand me,whowerespreadoutall overthisvastland.BharatMata,
MotherIndia,was essentially thesemillionsof people,and victoryto her
meantvictoryto thesepeople'.'2The toneof Nehru'slectureswouldhave
been familiar to anyaudiencein Chinaexposedto theuplifting speechesof
Sun Yat-senand members Party.Nehruand Sun Yat-sen
of his Nationalist
bothtriedto teachthepeoplethattheymadeup thenationand that,forall
theirdifferences, thenationmadethemone. In themeanwhile, theCongress
Partyof India and theNationalist Partyof Chinaoffered theonlyconcrete
evidenceof theexistenceof a singlepeoplein Indiaand China.Beforethe
peoplehadcometo a realization oftheirunityas a nation,each oftheparties
wouldsubstitute forthenationbyrepresenting itas a unified
state.
Whiletherewerecertainly close parallelsbetweenNehru'spedagogical
nationalismand the nationalismof the Chinese NationalistParty,the
NationalistPartyphase did not marknationalism's 'momentof arrival'in
Chinaas itdidin India.Nationalist thoughtcouldnotsettlecomfortably intoa
senseof nationalselfboundedby cultureor peoplein Chinabecauseevents
gave it littlecause for complacency.The early Republicangovernment
showedscantinclination to representthemythical peopleand,moreto the
point,even less capacityto assertnationalsovereignty. And unlikeIndia,
wherethenationalist movement had essentiallyone foreignstateto contend
with,Chinese nationalists confronted a dozen powersexercisingvarying
degrees of influenceon Chinese soil. Their authority was not always
l Perhapsthenearestequivalentto thisphasein Chinawas theanarchist movement. See

ArifDirlik's threerecentworks,The Originsof ChineseCommunism (Hong Kong:
OxfordUniversity Press,1989),Anarchism in theChineseRevolution(BerkeleyandLos
Angeles:University of CaliforniaPress,1991) and, withMing K. Chan,Schoolsinto
theGuomindang,
Fields and Factories:Anarchists, and theNationalLabor University
in Shanghai,1927-1932(Durham:DukeUniversity Press,1992).
12 JawaharlalNehru,The Discoveryof India. Firstpublished1945 (New York: Anchor,
and "History":Nehru'sSearchforIndia',
1960), p.29. See also Sanjay Seth,'Identity
ThesisEleven,no.32(1992),pp.37-54.

82 THE AUSTRALLANJOURNALOF CHINESE AFFAIRS
formalised in treaties,and theirinfluence reachedfarbeyondthe isolated

concessionsand leasedterritories whichpresented relatively
easy targetsfor
nationalist attack.The diffusion and formalinsubstantiality of the foreign
presencein China,relativeto India, made imperialism moredifficult to
conceptualize and muchharderto sell as thetargetfora popularmovement.
The enemyof the nationwas not the English,nor the Japaneseor the
Americans, but'imperialism'.
China, what is more,enjoyed nominalsovereignty throughout the
Republicand,withtheexceptionof theforeign concessions, was underthe
ruleof nativeadministrations. In appearanceandin fact,Chinesewereruling
Chinese.Indiannationalism couldachieveitsobjectiveof stateindependence
andsovereignty bytheseizureofstatepower- setting up an Indiannational
statein place of an effective colonialone - but in Chinathe lack of an
effective nativestateand thepersistence of foreign interventionin domestic
affairsleftnationalistswiththetaskofcreating an entirelynewkindof state.
This state-buildingprojectmadeChinaa farmorevolatilesetting thanIndia
fortheintroduction ofclass intonationalist thought. Onceconceivedin terms
of class, themulti-layered linkagesbetweendomesticand foreignpolitical,
socialandeconomicinterests couldbecometargets ofclassstruggle conceived
in the languageof statenationalism. Such a prospectis not anticipated in
Chatterjee's accountoftheIndiancase.
AbdullahLarouideals withclass and nationmoreexplicitly in his work
on intellectualelitesin theIslamicworld. Like Chatterjee, Larouiclassifies
thedevelopment of nationalistthought intophases,or evolvingproblematics,
buthe findsa definitive place forclass in themosthighlydevelopedformof
nationalism. Larouineglectsmentionof thesecondof Chatterjee's phases,
whichmaybe peculiarto India(or to Gandhi),butaddsa further thirdphase
whichhe terms'class nationalism'.
Where, in confrontation with Europe, the fundamentalistopposed a culture
(Chinese,Indian,Islamic) and the liberalopposed a nation(Chinese,Turkish,
Egyptian,Iranian),therevolutionaryopposesa class - one thatis oftenextended
to includeall thatpartof thehumanraceexploitedby theEuropeanbourgeoisie.
One mayrefertoitas class nationalismthatnevertheless
retainsmanyofthemotifs
ofpoliticalandculturalnationalisms;
hencethedifficulties
experienced bymanyof
theanalystswhohaveattempted todefineit.13
13 AbdullahLaroui,The CrisisoftheArabIntellectual (Berkeley:Universityof California

Press,1976), pp.121-2.I am grateful
to BrendaSansomforbringing thisworkto my
attention.
See BrendaSansom,'Minshengand NationalLiberation:SocialistTheoryin
theGuomindang', PhD Dissertation,
Universityof Wisconsin-Madison, 1988. See also
ArifDirlik,Culture,Societyand Revolution:
A CriticalDiscussionofAmericanStudies
of Modern Chinese Thought(Durham:Asian/Pacific StudiesInstitute,1985). It is
importantto distinguishherebetweenLaroui's 'class nationalism'
and theterm'class
nation'as sometimesused to describetheisomorphism betweenethnicityand social

In so faras NehruandSunYat-senset'thepeopleas nation'inopposition

to theWest,theymaylooselybe classedamongLaroui'sliberals.Similarly,
earlyIndianand ChineseMarxistswho counterposed a 'nationalclass' to
European imperialismmay be considered among Laroui's class
'revolutionaries'.Nationand class are by no meansidenticalconcepts,but
Asian Marxistsimaginedthemas co-extensivein fact: the Indian,the
Indonesianand theChinesepeopleswerenationalproletariats withina world
systemgoverned bytheEuropeanbourgeoisie.14 Thisis, however, a deceptive
examplewhichillustrates no morethanthepointoftransition betweenliberal
and class nationalism.Elementary ideas of class and class interestalso
featured in Laroui'sliberalnationalism andin Chatterjee's statenationalism.
Nehruhimself madetheuncompromising observation that'economicinterests
shape the politicalviews of groupsand classes. Neitherreasonnor moral
considerations overridethoseinterests'.15 In the Chineserevolution even
Communists have been reluctant to make such ambitiousclaimsforclass
interestor have at least triedto make allowanceforreasonedpersuasion
amongthe 'wavering'classes. In thecourseof its development, however,
Chinese nationalism reachedand exhaustedLaroui's finalphase of class
nationalism becauseitarticulated classdifferences within societyinpursuit of
thegoals of thenationstate.ChineseMarxistsdid notstopat defining the
nationalpeopleas an underprivileged class in a worldcapitalistsystem. They
went on to divide theirown societyinto revolutionary and counter-
revolutionary classes, and to identify the nationexclusivelywithclasses
whoseinterests appearedconsistent withachieving thestategoalsofunityand
independence. The nationalistmovement targeted a colonialstatein India,but
in China it inspireda civil war.The state,in thiscase, uncovereda very
different kindof nationfromanythathad comebeforein thepost-colonial
repertoire.
Even herean IndianMarxist, M. N. Roy,anticipated laterdevelopments
in China. Reflectingwith some ironyon the much-proclaimed spiritual
essenceof India,Roywrotethatthe'peculiarity' of India'does notlie in the
spiritualcharacterof its people but in the reactionary characterof its
bourgeoisie'.Whywas thebourgeoisiereactionary? Not on accountof its
resistance to proletariansocialistrevolution butbecauseitsmaterialinterests
renderedit, in Roy's words, 'historicallyincapable of . . . lead[ing] the
class in particular
historical
communities.
The Hungarian and Germantraders
gentry of
theHabsburgempirearetermed'class nations',in thisdifferent
sense,inA. J.P. Taylor,
TheHabsburgMonarchy 1809-1918(London:HamishHamilton, 1948).
14 MauriceMeisner,Li Ta-chaoand theOriginsof ChineseMarxism(Cambridge,
Mass:
HarvardUniversity
Press,1967).
15 Citedin Chatterjee,
Nationalist
Thought,
p.140.

nationalist
movement'.16To Roy, domesticbourgeoisties to international
capitalprejudiced
thestruggle
forstatesovereignty,
andhencethebourgeoisie
did not deserve inclusionin the nation.Nehru's nation,'thepeopleof
India . . . who were spread out all over this vast land' as Nehru described
them,becamein Roy's handssomeof thepeopleof India,whoseinterests
happenedto coincide with those of the state movementfor unityand
ButtheIndiannationdid,intheend,morecloselyapproximate
independence.
Nehru's'peopleof India' thanit did Roy's proletariat.
Whywas it in China
thatRoy'smoreselectiveclass-nation tookhold?
China theState,China theNation

We havenotedsomeofthehistorical reasonswhyChinashouldhavebeenthe
siteof a class warconductedin thenameof thenation.Paramount among
thesewas thehistory ofChinaas a unitary state.Hegelgavethisobservation
priorityin hiscomparisons ofChinaandIndia:'Thisis the
ofthecivilisations
firstpointto be observed:if Chinamaybe regardedas nothing else but a
State,Hindu politicalexistencepresentsus witha people,but no State'
(Hegel's emphasis).'7Even concedingthat Hegel's ideal of the state
effectively of India- andthathe was inclinedto
excludedtheprincipalities
reduceChinato nothing buta state- his moregeneralpointthatChina's
identitytooktheformof historical consciousness of a unitarystateremains
quitevalid. He need nothave confinedhis sightsto history. The universal
writtenlanguageandthehighcultureof imperial Chinacorresponded closely
withthereachof thestateandlivedon in theperformance of statefunctions.
Confucianism was a stateideology.Hegelmightconfidently havepredicted,
even if he could not have known,thatwhile Hinduismwould thrivein
twentieth-centuryIndia, Confucianian civilisationwould not survivethe
destructionoftheimperial Chinesestate.
Yet the Chinese state could survivethe death of Confucianism.
Conservative Chinesescholarsforesawthe declineand
nineteenth-century
disappearanceof Confucianism withsome clarity,and fearedthatChina
woulddisappearas a stateas well.'8On thispointtheywerewrong.While
16 Citedin SanjaySeth,'Marxismand theQuestionof Nationalismin a ColonialContext:

The Case of BritishIndia',PhD Dissertation,
Australian
NationalUniversity,
Canberra,
1989,p."14.
17 GeorgWilhelmFriedrichHegel, The Philosophyof History(translated by J. Sibree)
(New York:WilleyBookCo., 1944),p.161.CompareVon Schlegel'scomment, madeat
roughlythe same time: 'In China,beforethe introduction of the Indianreligionof
Buddha... thestateis all inall'. See Fredernck
Von Schlegel,ThePhilosophy ofHistory
(translated
byJ.B. Robertson) (London:HenryG. Bohn,1847),p.'24.
18 of Chinatoday,thereare threethingsI am most
So Yu Yue, 'As I look at thesituation
fearfulabout.One is thatthenameof Chlnaor "CentralNation"will be changed . .

Confucianism did not survivethe transformation of the state,the state

survivedpreciselybecauseit was transformed. Chinasurvivedthedeathof
Confucianism and muchelse besidesbecausetheidea of Chinawas attached
totheidealofa unitary stateratherthantotheideologyofa particular regime.
Indeed,nationalist thoughtgenerally assumedthatthedangerto whichChina
was mostvulnerable in thetwentieth century was thedestruction neither of
ideologyorculture, norevenofa national people,butthedisappearance ofthe
unitary state.Notunreasonably, thegreatdreadof Chinesenationalists from
nineteenth-century modernizers totwentieth-century communists has beenthe
collapse and disappearance of theunitary state,a fearwell capturedin the
phrase'thedeathofthestate'(wangguo).
In earlyusagetheterm'deathofthestate'referred to littlemorethanthe
downfallof a dynasty and,as one dynasty was generally replacedby another
in theoldercyclicalview of history, it impliedlittlemorethanan historical
transition betweenrulinghouses.Nothingstoodto die out- neither people
nor race, tradition nor state- apartfroma particular imperialline of
succession.Butoncehistory hadshifted froma cyclicaltoa secularrouteand
appearedto setitssightson progress, thephrase'deathofthestate'implieda
threatof far graverproportions. Progressofferedlittlereassurance on its
relentlessforward marchthatthecollapseof a recognizably Chinesestate
would yieldanotherin its place, or even thatthe 'Chinesepeople' would
survivethecollapseofthestate.'9Thesurvival ofthepeoplewas thought tobe
linkedirrevocably tothesurvival oftheunitary state,andtheterm'loss ofthe
state'summoned up morbidfearsofgenocide.20
Butwho,afterall,woulddie ifthestatewerelost?Moretothepoint,who
wouldbe savedalongwiththecountry ifitweresaved(jiu guo)?Theideaofa
distinctly Chinesepeoplehadsomeprecedent in thepubliclifeof theempire
butexactlywhichChinesepeoplewouldbe rescuedalongwiththestatehadto
be discoveredin theact of nationalsalvation.Thereis no one wordin the
Chineselanguagereferring to 'nation',as distinct fromstate(guo), and the
wantofa definitive namehasencouraged todefinethenationin
state-builders
waysconsistent withtheirstate-building The varietyof termswhich
efforts.
havebeenusedwherewe mightexpectto find'nation'givea fairindication
of therangeof optionsopento variousstateactorsin theirefforts to finda
peoplewhomtheymightrepresent. Wordsin commonusage have included
'citizen'(guomin, gongmin), 'people' (renmin) and 'race' (minzu),alongwith
the derivatives'Han race' (Hanzu) and 'Chineserace' (Zhonghuaminzu).
Each implies a different nation.Preciselywhich word most accurately
Chinacan remainChinaor 'CentralNation'as longas she does notcommunicate with

My second fear is thatConfucianismwill be
any of the othereight continents.
undermined destroyed.. .' Citedin Dun J.Li, Chinain Transition
and eventually 1517-
1911 (New York:Van NostrandReinholdCo., 1969),p.'63.
19 Meisner,Li Ta-chao,p.19.
20 FrankDikotter,TheDiscourseofRace inModemChina(London:Hurst& Co., 1992).

reflected thenationwas to be discoveredin theact of savingthestate:the

nationwas neither morenorless thanthosepeoplewhowouldbe represented
whenthestatesaveditself.
This particular problemof terminology reflects,in a broadersense,
difficulties
ofconceptualization thathoundednationalists ateveryturnintheir
attempts to conceiveof the nationalprojectin an ethicallanguagewhich
distinguished in mqstunrepresentative fashionbetweenrulers(Jun)andruled
(min),and whichwas groundedin an ethical-cyclical ratherthansecular
conception of time.So theidentity of thepeopleraisedethicaland historical
questionsas well as politicalones.Indeed,therewas notevena serviceable
wordforthehistorical and ethicalcommunity of 'China'. Amongthemany
faultswhichLiang Qichao attributed to the 'Chinese people' was their
inabilityto puta nameto theirowncountry: 'Hundreds of millionsof people
havemaintained thiscountryin theworldforseveralthousand years',Liang
complainedin 1900,'and yetto thisday theyhavenotgota namefortheir
country'.21Liangrepeatedthesameclaimin severalofhisessaysandalways
in thesametoneofastonishment.22 Chinahad,itwas true,beengivena name
in recenttimesbutnotby theChinesethemselves. Even theword'China'
(Zhongguo)'is whatpeopleofotherracescall us. It is nota namethepeople
of this countryhave selectedfor themselves'.23 The Chinesecustomof
referringto theirhistoricalcommunity by dynasty (chaodai) ratherthanby
country (guojia) impliedthattherewas in factno Chinesenationat all. Butin
Liang'sviewthewantofa namewas notso muchan indication ofthewantof
a nationas an indictment of the culturaland intellectual immaturity of a
peoplewhohadconsistently failedto recognizethattheyconstituted a nation.
Therewas a nation,he asserted, andthelackof a namewas no morethana
21 LiangQichao,'Zhongguojiruosuyuanlun' [On theSourceofChina'sWeakness],1900,

in Yinbingshiwenji [CollectedEssays fromthe Ice-Drinker'sStudio] (Shanghai:
Zhonghuashuju,n.d.),vol.2,coll. 5, pp.1242, esp.p.15.
22 See also 'Zhongguoshixulun'[Prefaceto A History
ofChina],1901,in Yinbingshi
heji,
[CollectedWorksfromthe Ice-Dnnker'sStudio] (Shanghai.Zhonghuashuju,n.d),
vol.3,coll.6,p.3.
23 LiangQichao,'Zhongguojiruo',p.15.The termZhongguowas certainly in use in China
beforethe modemperiodbut it designatedneitherthe countrynor the stateitself
Zhongguoreferred onlyin themostgeneralof tennsto theplace of theemperorat the
centreof theworld It firstappearancein theformaldesignation of statewas in the
attenuatedformof Zhonghuminguo[Republicof China]in 1912 But old habitsdie
hard.Not farfromthecapital,locals copedwiththecollapseof 'The GreatQingState'
(Da qingguo) byrefemng totheircountry simplyas 'The GreatState'(Da guo) intothe
1930s. See ReginaldF. Johnstone, Twilightin the ForbiddenCity(New York-D.
Appleton-CenturyCompany,1934),p 115.

'conceptual'error'lodgedin everyperson'sbrain'.The act of namingthe

peoplewouldmakea nationofthem.24
At thesametime,thenamechosentodefinethepeoplewoulddetermine
who shouldbe countedamongthemand how theyshouldbe expectedto
behaveas a nation.LiangQichaohimself optedfortheidealofthecitizen.He
believedthatthetermracecouldnotbe appliedto theChinesenation.There
was no necessarycorrelation betweenethnicgroupsand states in the
composition of nation-states,and a racialdefinition of thenationmightwell
provea barrier tostate-building ina multi-ethniccommunity suchas China.In
China,he continued, theinterests of staterequirednationalists to severthe
connection betweenethnicity and nationalidentity in orderto maintainthe
territorialintegrity of an empirewhichwas hometo manyethnicgroups.
Liang invented theterm'broadnationalism' (da minzuzhuyi)to distinguish
his ideal ofcorporate nationalidentity, focusing on thenation-state, fromthe
'narrownationalism'(xiao minzuzhuyi)whichfocusedon ethnicity. He
definedethnicidentity(minzu)using customary distinctions of common
territory,ancestry, language,religionand custom,butdefinedthecitizenry
subjectivelyas a groupwhose consciousnessof theircorporateidentity
bestowedupon them individualidentitiesas citizens.Ethnicitywas a
birthmark peoplecarriedin theirsleep,incontrast tocitizenship, whichwas a
graduatediplomafrom the stategranted to those who had awakened as
citizens.Liangthen devisedan ethicsof nationalcitizenshipwhich linkedthe
awakenedselfwiththecommunity ofthenation-state through theidealofthe
'citizen'. In time,he came to use the termscitizenand state (guojia)
interchangeably and to press for their simultaneousawakening.The
awakening of thenation,forLiang,was coterminous withthemanufacture of
an awakenedcitizenry.25
Revolutionary nationalists,however, identifiedthenationwiththeidea of
race.Sun Yat-senrepudiated the'Western'modelofthenation-state favoured
by Liang Qichao,in whichcitizensrelatedirecfly to thestateas individuals,
but his conceptof 'race' was no less state-oriented in its originsand its
orientation.26 Certainly, Sun's personalself-awakening was boundup withan
acuteconsciousness of skincolourand facialfeatures, and witha heightened
sensitivity to etiquetterather thanto ethics.But hisconcernfortheracewas
inseparable fromhisfearofthe'deathofthestate'.ThefateinstoreforChina
was likelyto be farworsethanthatenduredby theKoreansandVietnamese,
he counselled,whowerealready'slaveswhohadlosttheirstates'(wangguo
24 LiangQichao,'Zhongguojiruo',p.14.
25 Hao Chang, Liang Ch'i-ch'ao and IntellectualTransitionin Chmna,1890-1907
Press,1971),pp.260-1.
Mass.: HarvardUniversity
(Cambridge,
26 byFrankW.
Sun Yat-sen,San MinChuI, TheThreePnnciplesofthePeople(translated
Ministry
Pnce andeditedbyL. T. Chen)(Chungking: 1943),p.115.
ofInformation,

nu). The peopleof China,however,wouldnotevenbe preserved as slaves

becauseinChinathelossofstatethreatened the'destructionofourrace' 27
Makinga virtueofnecessity, Suninsistedthatobservations suchas Liang
Qichao's on thelack of distinction
betweennationand statein theChinese
languagewas a logicalcorollary of theidentityof race and statein China's
history.Othercountrieswereobligedtodrawappropriate distinctions
between
the stateand the nationbecause theywere historically benightedby the
coexistenceof several'races' undertheone state,or by thedivisionof one
'race' amongmanystates.China,Sunargued,was singularly favoured in this
respect:
China,sincetheQin andHan dynasties, a singlestateoutof a
has beendeveloping
singlerace,whileforeign havedevelopedmanystatesfromone raceand
countries
haveincludedmanynationalities
withlnone state.28
Not surprisingly, Sun concludedthathis own Principleof Nationalism
was equivalentto the 'doctrineof thestate'.29His candididentification of
nationalism as a statedoctrinerested,nevertheless, on an assertionof the
racialunityof theChinesepeoplewhichseemedto defytheevidenceof the
senses.In fact,hisdefinition of theChineseracewas heavilyqualifiedby his
understanding of thenature,limitsandfunction of thestateitself.WhenSun
insistedthattheChinesepeoplewereraciallydistinct fromall other'races' of
theworld,he drewtheboundaries oftheracealongtheborders oftheChinese
stateand wouldallow no comparable ethnicdistinctionsto be drawnwithin
Chinaitself.The gene-poolof therace,in otherwords,happenedto coincide
withtheborders ofthestate.Minority peopleswereaskedtoadjusttheirbelief
and behaviouraccordingly if theywishedto be countedamongthe'Chinese
people'. In time,theNationalist government prescribed an elaboratecultural
regimento assistthepeopleofTibet,Mongolia,Manchuria, Xinjiangandthe
Han regionsto achievea thorough comprehension of theircommonracial
identityandtorecoverthesentiment of 'centralloyalty'towardtheNationalist
state.30
27 Sun Yat-sen,San Min,pp.12,38. On Sun's concernwithetiquette,

see myforthcoming
book, The Irony of the Chinese Revolution:The NationalistRevolutionand the
'Awakening'ofModernChina(Stanford UniversityPress).
28 Sun Yat-sen,San Min,p.6.
29 Ibid.,p.4
30 Chiang Kai-shekpresenteda similarargument at a much laterstage,the betterto
illustrate notonlyone nation,butone race'.
thepointthattheChlnesepeople'constitute
See ChiangKai-shek,China's Destiny,firstpublishedin 1943 (translated by Wang
Chung-hui)(New York.The MacmillanCompany,1947),pp.'0-13 Two of Chlang's
closest associates,the Chen brothers,
implemented thlsvisionin a language-reform
programin the 1930sand 1940s.ChenGuofubelievedthat'Chlna's abilityto achieve
unityis entirelydependenton havinga unifiedwnttenlanguage',and hlsbrother,
Chen

Othershelddifferent notionsof whatthethreat ofthe'deathofthestate'

impliedforthenation,arisingin partfromdiffering conceptions ofthenation
itself.Two of the leadingintellectuals who were to foundthe Chinese
Communist Party,Li Dazhao andChenDuxiu,engagedin a noveldebateon
theprospect ofthecollapseofthestatesomeyearsbeforeturning toMarxism
foranswersto thequestion.For Li Dazhao, thedeathof the statedid not
threatenracialgenocidebutinvolvedinsteada graveriskof loss of territory,
cohesionandnationalidentity. Still,theprospectofitsloss filledhimwithan
equal senseofdread:whether itwas thought toentailloss ofrace,territory or
theloss of thestatewas countedthegreatest
politicalidentity, loss of all.31
Nevertheless, theidentificationof thenationwas confounded by thetaskof
evaluating particularstateformations in Chlna'shistoryas a unitarystate.Li
Dazhao had onlyrecently expressedhis dreadof 'loss of thestate'whenhis
friend,ChenDuxiu,published an articleon thesubjectin 1913.A statewhich
failedto inspirepatriotismwas,in Chen'sview,nota stateat all, becausea
truestatewas one whichinspired a nationalpeopleto achievetheendsofthe
stateitself.'Once the meaningof the statehas been clearedup', Chen
proclaimed,' . . . one can even go so faras to say thatwe Chinese have never
Fromthesereflections,
as yetsetup a state'.32 ChenDuxiuderivedtheradical
conclusionthatthe collapse of the Republicanstate,as it was presenfly
constituted,would be a matterof litfiemomentto those who professed
concern forthe 'deathofthestate'.
In conceivingof patriotism as love of the state,Chen Duxiu was led
inevitablyto theconclusionthata state-directed patriotismwas boundto fail
in theabsenceofa perfect state.Li Dazhao thenproposeda corrective,in the
formof a particularkindof relationship betweencitizenand state:patriotism
couldbe expressedin theact ofperfecting thestate,and madeuniversalby
extendingtheauthority The nation,in turn,
of thestateoverall itscitizens.33
Lifu,put forwarda plan forcompulsoryinstructionin Chinesescriptforall minority

See JohnDe Francis,Nationalismand LanguageReformin
peoples on thefrontiers.
China(Pnnceton:Princeton Press,1950),p.83.
University
31 of 'loss of state'thecase of theJews,'a lostpeoplewhodream
Li citedin illustration
aboutrecovering theircountry',as fairwarningof the fatein storeforthe Chlnese
peopleshouldtheyfailtopreserve theirstate.Meisner,Li Ta-chao,p 19.
32 Chen Duxiu, 'Patriotismand Consciousnessof Self', Jiayinzazhi [TigerMagazine],
alongwith
and translated,
vol.1,no.4 (10 November1914). Chen's articleis excerpted
Li Dazhao's reply 'Pessimismand Consciousnessof Self', Jiayinzazhi [Tiger
Magazine],vol.1,no.8 (10 August1915),in HeleneCarrered'Encausseand StuartR
Schram,Marxismand Asia: An Introduction withReadings(London:PenguinPress,
1969),pp.204-8.The present is adaptedfromp.205.
translation
33 Li Dazhao, 'Pessimismand Consciousnessof Self',in Carrered'Encausseand Schram,
Marxismand Asia, pp.207-8.Li Dazhao's emphasison thewillin his rebuttalof Chen
Duxiu was seminal.MauriceMeisnerhas notedthatLi's stressat thispoint'on the

consistedof all those who loved theirstate.Once patriotism had been

channelledinto the rhetoricof stateideologyand came to be expressed
exclusivelyin the iconographyof the state, the problemof Chinese
nationalism resolveditselfintoa choiceamongstateformations competing for
thelove andloyaltyof theChinesepeople.Conversely, oncepeoplehadbeen
offered a choiceofregimes, thenthosewhodeclinedto love a particular state
forfeited theirrightto be countedamongthoseit represented; thatis, to be
countedamongthe'Chinesepeople'.
Whena nationis conceivedprimarily as a politicalcommunity thereis
littleto preventpoliticalcriteriafromservingto definemembership of the
nation,or indeedfromdetermining itsconstituent categoriessuchas citizen,
race or socialclass withoutreference to politics.The application
of selective
criteriaformembership of the stateshouldnot surpriseus: in democratic
theory, politically-empoweredcitizensowe an obligation to thestatein return
forthe rightsand protections whichit affords. Indeed,the transitionfrom
absoluteruletoliberaldemocracy inthestatesofEuropewas accompanied by
the selectiveapplicationof property rightsand genderqualifications in
determining rightsofcitizenship.Whenmembership ofthenation,however, is
a derivative of membership of thestate,thereis no nationleftto whichthe
disempowered mightappeal. The nationis exclusivelythe body of those
empowered bythestateitself.
State,Nationand Class
'Class' entered to 'citizen'andto 'race'
discourseas an alternative
nationalist
in conceivingof thenationas a politicalcommunity. And it was employed,
like citizenand race, as an icon of statesovereignty and nationalunity.
Communists employedtheidea ofclassmuchas liberalsusedtheidealofthe
citizen,or the Nationalistsused race, to assertthe essentialunityof the
Chinese people in the face of primordialattachments to lineage and
community, andin lightoftheneedtorelatethenationto theworld.Thislast
point is worthemphasizing.Nationalistsand Communists, in particular,
derivedtheirdifferentconceptionsofthenationfromdistinctive and
historical
ethicalconceptions oftheworldorderwithin whichthenation-state happened
to finditself- in theone case a 'struggle forsurvival'amongraces,and in
theothera struggle forsupremacy amonginternational class formations.The
Communists and Nationalists
bothturned theirrespective assessments of the
worldorderbackuponthenationinan effort toreconstitutethenationas a full
andequal member oftheworldcommunity; thatis,as a state.
abilityof conscious,activemento shapeevents'was a radicaldeparture

forLi himself
and markedthesourceof an originaland indigenousstrainof Marxismwhichwas to
develop underhis tutelagein China. Chen Duxiu's ratherdifferent
emphasison the
limitationsimposedby 'objective'conditionsalso inspiredfollowersamongChinese
Marxists.See Meisner,Li Ta-chao,pp.21-6

It is customary to go aboutanalysing therelationship betweenMarxism

andanti-colonial nationalism in oneoftwoways,theonerather moreandthe
otherrather less sympathetic to theMarxistproject.BothtakeLeninas their
pointofdeparture andneither sharestheantipathy tonationalism foundin the
earlyMarxiancanon.'The greatmassofproletarians are,bytheirverynature,
freefromnationalprejudices. . . ' commented Engelsin 1845,aftera visitto
the Festival of Nations in London. For Engels, as for Marx himself,
substituting a proletarian statefora bourgeoisstatemeantunmasking the
fallacyof thenation,in effectdemolishing nationalconsciousness: 'Onlythe
proletarians can destroy nationality,
onlytheawakening proletariat
can bring
about fratemalism betweenthe different nations'.34The 'Theses on the
Nationaland ColonialQuestions'producedunderLenin's directionin the
1920sidentified a morepositiverolefornational consciousness.
The first lineofapproachto whichI referremainssympathetic toLenin's
purpose:it tracesanti-colonial sentiments back through thedeliberations of
LeninandtheCommunist International (Comintern) to showtheinstrumental
role of Marxistsocialismin emancipating colonialand semi-colonial states.
The second- muchless sympathetic toLenin- also focuseson Communist
Partyideology,organizationand tacticsbut sees Marxism-Leninism as
supplyinga powerfulorganizational framework and a potentideological
formulathattogether tip thebalancein favourof Marxist-Leninist parties
competing againstmorenaivenationalist movements in thestruggle forstate
power.The twoapproaches arerelatedtotheextentthattheyfocus,forbetter
or worse,on theinstrumental aspectsof Marxism-Leninism in anti-colonial
movements. Bothalso assumethenationof thepost-colonial stateto be self-
evidentandunproblematic: thenationis thenationalpeopleon whosebehalf
the revolutionaries fightforstateunityand sovereignty, not least among
themselves.
CertainlyChina's Marxist-Leninists neverabandonedthe idea of a
distinctivelyChinesenationwhentheysetouttocreatetheirnewstate.To the
contrary, whereEngelsattackedthebourgeoisstateon thegroundthatthere
was no commongood or nationwhichthe statecould rightlyclaim to
represent,Chinese Leninists attacked the 'bourgeois', 'feudal' and
'bureaucratic capitalist'states(specificallytheearlyRepublican, warlordand
Nationalistones) because each failed to representthe Chinese nation
adequately.Theirattacksindirectly theexistenceof a Chinese nation
affnmned
on whosebehalftheyproposedto carryout theirrevolution. But thenation
neededto be reconfiguredin orderto meritand to attainits own salvation;
hencethecontentof thenationwas undernegotiation at everypointin the
process.In thisrespectMarxism-Leninism
state-building was littledifferent
fromotherprocedures foridentifyingthenationin nationalism: like liberal
4 See KarlMarxandFrederick Engels,CollectedWorks1845-48(London:Lawrenceand

Wishart,1976),vol.6,p.6. RonaldoMunckhighlightsthisambivalencein TheDifficult
Dialogue: Marxismand Nationalism(London:Zed Books,1986),p.6.

92 THEAUSTRALIAN
JOURNAL
OF CHINESEAFFAIRS
theoryandracialnationalism, itoffered usefulinsights forstate-buildersintent

on givingcontentto theirnation.If China's Marxist-Leninists are to be
countednationalist, then,it is notjustin Lenin'ssenseof nationalstrategists
pursuing international proletarian revolutionbutin thesenseof state-builders
searching fora nationwhichtheymightrepresent adequatelyin theformof
thenation-state.
The moment of arrivalof the'class nation'cameovertheperiodof the
May FourthMovement andNationalist Revolution, from1919through to the
late 1920s,whentheidea of class intersected withtheidea of thenationin
threedistinct andmutually reinforcing ways.The first, heavilyindebted tothe
anarchists'earlyexperiments in class-analysis of the international system,
conceived of China as a nationalcommunitypossessingall of the
characteristics (anddeserving all ofthesympathy) oftheclassicproletariat in
Marxiansocial analysis.The patriarch of theChineseCommunist Party,Li
Dazhao, locatedthedomainof class struggle in thecontemporary era in the
fieldofinternational relations.The unitofclassanalysiswas thenationitself:
nationssuffering imperialistoppressionwere labelled membersof the
international 'proletariat',andtheoppressor nationswerethought to makeup
a transnational 'bourgeoisie'.In thiscase,theidea ofclass servedtoestablish
China'splace in theworldas a distinctive class nation,on themodelof the
class nationalism identifiedby AbdullahLarouiin his typology of colonial
nationalisms, within an evolvinginternational classstruggle.
Buttheidea oftheclassnationdidnotstophere.Class was married more
intimately withtheideal of thenationwhennationalrevolutionaries triedto
accountforthemarkeddegreeof regionaldifferences and local attachments
amongthepeopleof China.The prospectof a nationally uniform modeof
production givingshape to comparablesocial classes fromone end of the
country to theotheroffered new hopefora nationwhichappearedbesetby
highlylocalizedculturaland socialdifferentiation. Withtheaid of Marxism,
regionalvariation in levelsof economicdevelopment couldbe shownto be
tending towardhistorical uniformity: whentheforcesofhistory weremoving
the entirenationinexorably and uniformly from one mode of production
('feudal')toanother ('capitalist'),regionalvariationcouldbe showntosignify
no morethanregionally differentialratesof development alonga uniformly
nationalhistorical pattern.
Thisparticular conception ofnationalunitywas first setoutin arguments
mountedagainstchampionsof provincialautonomy,in a debate over
federalism in 1922.Communist PartySecretary-General ChenDuxiu showed
as keen a determination as Sun Yat-sento rule out the possibilitythat
sentimental attachments to lineageand localityshouldbe giveninstitutional
expressionat thepoliticallevel.To preserve theintegrity of thestate,Chen
and Sun assertedthe unityof the nation.Both resortedto essentialist
charactenzations of the Chinese nation - Sun as race, Chen as a
configuration ofrevolutionary classes- in an attempt todenythattherewere
significant categoriesof difference dividingthe countryinto distinctive

regionsalong cultural,social or ethnicboundaries.For example,while

targetingwarlords forforciblydividingthecountry, Chenalso challenged the
legitimacyof all otheremblemsof culturaland socio-economic diversity
whichthreatened todo thesame.He mounted a rangeofarguments toexplain
whytherewouldbe littlescope forintroducing a federalistor regionally-
differentiated
politicalsystemin Chinaeveniftherewereno warlords at all.
His case was builton an assumptionoftheconvergence oftheChinesenation
aroundnationalsocialclasses.
Federalism,arguedChen Duxiu, was best suitedto countrieswith
regionallydifferentiatedeconomies,languages,religionsand cultures.This
was notthecase withChina.Chinawas onecountry housinga single'Chinese
people' (zhonghuaminzu)withina uniformsocio-economicsystem.As
China's economywas subjectto theuniversallaws of history, thenation's
million-strong industrial suppliedthe historical
proletariat fixativeto bond
theirfourhundred millioncompatriots intoone. 'The economicsituation of
the people of Chinais uniformly and graduallymovingfromthe stageof
agricultureand handicraftindustryto that of industrialproduction',
pronounced Chen,inSeptember 1922.'Thereis littledifference
betweennorth
and south'.35The same social,or class,differences whichdividedthenorth
social divisionservedto mark
also prevailedin thesouth;so, paradoxically,
China'sunityas a nation.
While Chen Duxiu could hardlydenythattherewere differences of
custom,languageand religiousbeliefamongthepeople of China,he was
inclinedto denythattherewas a regionalaspectto theirvariation. Cultural
and religiousdistinctions were nationalin scope and hence offeredlittle
comfort toadvocatesoflocalself-government undera federalsystem:
Althoughthereis some slightdifferencein pronunciation
in thenativelanguage,
thewritten scriptandstructure Andalthough
ofthelanguageareidentical. thereare
religiousdistinctions
amongBuddhism, Daoism,ChristianityandIslam,in no case
do thesecorrespond withplacesofdwelling.36
Chen could claimwithconfidence thattherewas littlecorrespondence
betweenreligiousbeliefandgeography becauseTibet,XinjiangandMongolia
werenotat issue amonghis partisanreaders.His reference to thecommon
Chinesescriptserveda similarpurposein assertingthe unityof the Han
peoplesdespiteimmenseregionalvariety in theirspokenvemaculars and the
recognizedstrengthof theirlocal attachments.In assumingthatthepeople
themselvesweremisledin theirloyalties, Chenemployedclass in muchthe
samewaythatChiangKai-shekwas laterto use theterm'race': as a signifier
35 Chen Duxiu, 'Lianshengzizhi yu Zhongguozhengxiang'[The FederalSystemand

China's Political Situation],Xiangdao zhoubao (The Guide Weekly], vol.1 (13
September1922),p.2.
36 Ibid.,p.2.

oftheunityof thenationalpeoplewhichthepeoplethemselves couldnotyet

fully'comprehend'.
Chen'scomrade,Cai Hesen,wenta stepfurther in arguingthatpolitical
differencesbetweennorthand south,or betweenliberalandmassdemocrats,
could also be reducedto differences betweensocial classes. Hence 'class
warfare'(jieji would
zhanzheng) supplya forceforunitysufficient
ultimately
to overcome regionalpolitical as
differences well as culturaland economic
ones:
The domesticchaos and fighting of thelastdecade is nota struggleforterritory
between'North'and the'South',nora struggle theConstitution'
over 'Protecting
or 'BreakingtheConstitution',nor evena between
struggle 'Unity'and 'Division'
It is a strugglebetweenthe old dominantfeudalclass and the newlyarisen
class: a kindofclass warfare.37
revolutionary
Cai Hesen's commentson the class characterof politicaldisputes
anticipatedthethird pointofentry ofclassintorevolutionary nationalism.The
idea of class helpedto distinguishtrueand falsemembers of the nationby
helpingtoidentify alliesandenemies of therevolutionary stateitself.
Revolutionary did notset out to makeclass enemiesat the
nationalists
outsetoftheirnationalrevolution. The Nationalistswereinhibited fromdoing
so bytheirideology,andtheCommunists proposedtorefrain fromdoingso at
least untilthe completion of nationalreunification.For all concerned, the
NationalistRevolution Thisdid
of the1920swas to be an 'all class' affair.38
notmeanthattherevolution lackeda politicaltargetor thatit failedto make
tangiblepoliticalenemies.Sun Yat-senidentified enemiesamongtheremnant
functionaries of theQing and supporters of warlordadministrations. There
wereeven enemieswithintheranksof therevolutionary partyitself.Some
Nationalistsobjectedto theblanketcondemnation of warlords forfearthatit
wouldalienatetheparty'swarlordallies,and othersfearedthatthemilitant
toneof anti-imperialistrhetoricwas boundto makelifedifficult forthemin
37 yujunfageju' [Military
Cai Hesen, 'Wuli tongylyu lianshengzizhi:junfazhuanzheng
ReunificationandFederalism: WarlordDictatorship Xiangdao
andWarlordSeparatism],
zhoubao,no 2 (20 September 1922),p.14.
38 The ChineseCommunist leaderChenDuxiu wentso faras to suggestthatan 'all class'
revolutionwas theonlykindof revolution possiblein Chinaat thistime ChenDuxiu,
'Zhongguoguomingemingyu shehuige jieji' [China'sNational Revolutionand its
VariousSocial Classes],Qianfeng[TheVanguard], no 2 (1 December1923) On theside
needlessto say, thuswas an axiomof therevolutionSun Yat-sen
of theNationalists,
believedthatthe'entirecountry'wouldnse up and overwhelm theforcesof militarism
and imperialism and carry the to
Nationalists power. See Sun Yat-sen,Guofuquanji
[TheCompleteWorksoftheFatheroftheCountry] (Taipei:Dangshiweiyuanhui,1973),
vol 2,p.598.

the foreignconcessionat home or in colonial societiesabroad.39Many

Nationalistsalso feltuneasyaboutadmitting Communists intotheirpartyand
wereembarrassed bytheirparty'scloseassociationwiththeSovietUnion.On
theCommunist side,disputeseruptedwithintheCommunist Partyoverthe
detailsof its cooperationwiththe Nationalists and over the high-handed
attitude
of theThirdCommunist International(Comintern) anditsadvisersin
China.And,inMoscow,therationale andconductofthealliancewas a source
of controversy withintheSovietleadership and amongthemajorinstitutions
whichclaimeda legitimate interestin thematter,includingtheComintern,
Narkomindel andProfintern.40Butpoliticalenemies,generally were
speaking,
notconceivedin termsofsocialclassesuntiltherevolution gotunderway, for
early misgivingsand disputesamong all partiesto the revolutionwere
arbitrated
arounda commonagreement on thepoliticalgoalsoftherevolution
to 'overthrow warlordsand imperialism'. These twingoals servedas a
commontestfortellingwho werethefriends and theenemiesof stateand
nationalike.
Few made any connection betweenwarlordsand the social forcesof
'feudalism'beforethe revolutiongot underway;warlordswere enemies
chieflybecause theyheld guns and pointedthemin the directionof the
revolutionaries.41
EventheComintern countedclassstatusan inadequatebasis
39 See my'TheIronyof theChineseRevolution:

TheNationalists
andChineseSociety,
1923-1927',in JohnFitzgerald
(ed.), TheNationalists
and ChineseSociety,1923-19377:
A Symposium
(Melbourne:
Melbourne
University
History
Monographs,
1989),pp.13-43.
40 See S. T. Leong,Sino-SovietDiplomaticRelations,1917-1926(Canberra:Australian
NationalUniversity
Press,1976); ConradBrandt,Stalin'sFailurein China,1924-1927
(NewYork:Norton & Co., 1966);Robert C. North,MoscowandChineseCommunists
(Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press,1963);AlanS. Whiting, SovietPoliciesinChina,
1917-1924 (Stanford:Stanford University
Press,1953)
41 ChinesenationalistsandComintern agentsdrewextensivelyonthewritings ofMarxand
Leninwhentheywrote offeudalism buttheyultimatelyarrived of
atan understanding
theroleofwarlords innationalist
politics
which cameclosertothewritings ofGennan
nationalists
- inparticular toMaxWeber'scritique ofJunkers inthemodemGennan
state- thantoanyintheMarxian canon.Marxattnbuted a socialbasetofeudalismand
Lenintargetedthesocialbaseoffeudallordsinnational liberation butitwas
struggles,
Weberwhofirst singled outthegreatfeudallordsas political enemiesofthenation-
state.Weberbelieved thatin thefaceofinternationalcompetitiontheprincipleofthe
nationassumed priorityoverall othervaluesandhencethatpoliticaleliteswhichfailed
to confonn withthenation-building enterprise
surrendered theirmoralauthorityto
governWhenhesetoutthisprinciple inhisinaugural
lecture atFrieburginMay1895,
Weberpronounced thattheJunkers wereunfit togovernbecausetheyemployed Polish
day-labourersin place of Gennanones.This he deemeda slighton theGennan
labouringclasses,sufficient
atleasttoshowthattheJunkers lackedthekindofnational
consciousnessGennany demanded ofitsleadersinanageofcompeting If
nation-states.

for distinguishing friendsand enemies in the Chinese revolution.Its

'Directiveson theApplication of the1920Agrarian Theses'setan important
precedentfor flexibleinterpretation of agrarianfeudalismby notingthat
whether or notthelandlordclass shouldbe singledout forstruggle in the
nationalphase of revolution dependeduponthepositionlandlordsadopted
towardimperialism, ratherthanthenature oftheirrelationswiththestruggling
peasantmasses.42 HeretheComintern establishedthecardinalprinciple that
politicalattitudestowarda nationalenemyoffered a morereliableguagefor
identifying friendsandenemiesin nationalrevolution thanclass statusper se.
Another criterionforidentifying friends andenemieswas Lenin'sremark on
theownership of largeestates.In its 1922 'Theseson theEasternQuestion'
theComintern identified
thedomestic enemyofnational revolution as 'feudal'
largelandowners and confirmed Lenin's call fortheexpropriation of their
properties.Thesetwincriteria - political attitudes
andownership of 'estates'
- wereconsideredcloselyrelatedin practice,because 'alien imperialism'
makesthe'feudal'elitean 'instrument ofitsrule'.43The Comintern explicitly
identified the feudalclass in nativeChinesesocietyas the 'tuchuns',or
warlords, whichwereequatedwiththeJunkers of theold Germanstatesand
elevatedto the statusof a social class accordingly. Warlordscame to be
countedfeudalon a number ofdifferent counts- fordividing thepolityinto
regionalsatrapiesand opposingthedevelopment of thebourgeoisieand of
'bourgeoisdemocracy'- but if they represented anythingotherthan
themselves itwas thought to be thealienforceofforeign capitalin itshighest
stage of imperialism.44 Their presumedrole in representing the greater
landlordclass camesomewaydownthelistofwarlord crimes.It was enough
thattheyseemedto be dividingthenationalcake and surrendering it,on a
plate,toforeigners.
In theevent,themaximthatwarlords and imperialism wereenemiesof
thenationwas sufficiently flexibleto accommodate domestic'feudal'social
forcesamongtheenemiesof thenationas well. Indeed,any institution or
groupof peoplereluctant to takeup theinvitation to attackfeudalismand
imperialism,or perhaps bold enough to challenge the right of the
revolutionariestodefinethefriends andenemiesofthenationon theirbehalf,
couldwithgoodreasonbe countedan ancilliary offeudalinterests ora lackey
of imperialism. As lateas April1924,ChenDuxiudistinguished radicalfrom
Junkerauthority
lackedan ethicalfoundation
it was becausetheJunkers
refusedto
recognize
andtocomply withthenational andnot,as MarxorLeninwouldsay,
interest
becausethey
werethecorruptvestiges
ofa dyingsocialorder.
42 See JaneDegras(ed.), The Communist 1919-1943,Documents(London:
International,
Frank
CassandCo. Ltd.,1971),vol.1,pp.394-8.
43 Ibid.,pp.382-93.
44 Michael Luk, The Originsof ChineseBolshevism:An Ideologyin theMaking,1920-
1928(HongKong:Oxford
University
Press,1990),p.147.

THENATIONLESSSTATE 97
conservative withintheNationalist
factions Partyby thesimpleexpedient of
identifyingpartymembers'attitudesto the twin politicalgoals of the
revolution.Chenannouncedthattheclass originsof his enemieswerequite
immaterial.45But thissimpleact of faithno longersufficedafter1925.With
thecollapseof theMay Thirtieth Movement in Shanghai,andin theongoing
struggleforlocal powerin therevolutionaries' base in Guangdong,
southern
friendsand enemiesof therevolution declaredthemselves by theircollective
positionson the contestfor state power betweenthe revolutionaries
(representingthenation)and theliberals,chambers ofcommerce, local elites
and warlordswho resistedthem.46 By virtueof theiroppositionto the
revolutionariesthese groups effectivelyexcluded themselves from
membership of the nation.Class strugglethenenteredChina's national
revolution underNationalist
oftheparty-state,
at theinvitation Partyauspices,
notas an instrumentof socialrevolutionbutas a technique forreconfiguring
thenationin a formconsonant withtheunitywhichtherevolutionary state
soughtforitself.
Marxism,Nationalismand theClass Nation

turnupontheirown 'people'without
Can nationalists theirclaim
surrendering
In referring
tobe nationalist? tonationalism referto its
in China,we generally
pointin itsowndevelopment
meaningat a particular whennationalist
thought
themeaningof
thestatewiththeChinese'race'. This is certainly
identified
thenationconveyedtotheWestin China'sprotracted civilwar.WhenChiang
Kai-shekwentlookingfora stickwithwhichto beattheCommunists, it was
theferocityof theircampaignsagainst'theirownpeople'whichmostclearly
markedthemas nationalenemies:
It is onlytooclearnowthatCommunistscanneverhaveanysenseofloyalty to
their owncountry:theyaredevoidofpatriotism In fact
consciousness.
ornational
theyhavenolovefortheir countrybuttheywilldeliberately
workagainstnational
interests.Theyfeelno compunctionevenif ... theyshouldbe calleduponto
genocideon theirownpeople.47
perpetrate
In the 1930s,by Nationalist Communists
fighting
reckoning, was more
patrioticthan fightingJapanesetroops on China's soil because the
45 ChenDuxiu,'Guomindang zuoyipai ofLeftand

zhizhenyiyi'[TheTrueSignificance
RightFactionsintheNationalistParty],
Xiangdao zhoubao[TheGuideWeekly],no.62
(23 April1924),pp.3-4.
46 This argument is set out in greater 'The Misconceived
detailin JohnFitzgerald,
Revolution:StateandSociety inChina'sNationalist
Revolution, Journal
1923-1926', of
AsianStudiesvol.49,no.2(May1990),pp.323-43.
47 Emphasisadded.AdaptedfromChiangKai-shek, SovietRussiain China(revised
(NewYork:Farr,
edition) StraussandCudahy,1968),pp88-9.

Communists threatened farmorethantheterritorial integrity of thecountry.

They challengedthe ego boundariesof the nationalself.The Nationalists
thoughtof themselvesas a movementforunitinga dividedpeople, and
believedthatanyattempt to exacerbate divisionswithinsocietyor to
existing
turnone partagainstanotherwas treasonous.48 In theCommunist Partyof
China,theNationalists confronted notonlya rivalpoliticalmovement butan
alternativedefinitionofthenation.
Neitherdefinition could countenancethe other.To the makersof
NationalistChinaanyconcessionthatyieldedthefundamental integrityofthe
race(howeverfictional thisidea) was notan alternative to nationalextinction
buta fonn ofnationalextinction. Therhetoric ofthecivilwarwhichsweptthe
Communists to powerin the 1940sretained theessentialist styleof thought
characteristicofmodemChinesenationalism, although in thiscase elaborated
aroundthe idea of social class. On the twenty-eighth anniversary of the
founding of theCommunist Partyin 1949,whenMao Zedongredefined the
'people'on behalfofthePeople'sRepublicofChina,he raisedonceagainthe
centralissueof China'snationalrevolution. 'Whoarethepeople?',he asked.
'At thepresentstagein China,theyare theworking class,thepeasantry, the
urbanpettybourgeoisie andthenationalbourgeoisie'. Thesefourclasseswere
selectedforinclusion on thenationalflagofthePeople'sRepublicin theform
of foursmallstarsorbiting thegreater starof thePeople's state.The rest-
'the landlord class and the bureaucratbourgeoisie,as well as the
representatives of thosesocialclasses' - wereexcludedfromtheinsigniaof
stateandfromtheranksofthe'people'.49
The composition of the 'people',as Mao implied,was to changeonce
Chinahadmovedbeyondits'present stage'.Andso itdid.The landlord class
and the 'petty'and 'national'bourgeoisiewereeliminated as social classes
overthefirstdecadeof Communist Partyrule,afterwhichclass struggle no
longer characterizedrelationsamong actual social classes. Instead, it
characterized relationsbetweenthe stateand the survivors of earlierclass
struggles(the 'bad class elements',as theywereknown),and came to be
identifiedwith conflictsamong competing'class ideologies' withinthe
structureof thestateitself.Subsequent politicalconflictsat thehighest levels
of partyandstateentailedterrible sufferingforthedispossessedscionsof the
landlordandpetty-bourgeois classes,whowereheldto accountfortheerrors
of their'representatives' amongMao's politicalenemies.Nevertheless, they
no longerconstituted a social class in thesenseof a social formation. Bad
class elementswerekeptalive beyondthecollapseof theirclass formations
chieflyto providea 'real' socialreferent forMao Zedong'spoliticalenemies
to represent, and to be tauntedand killedas politicalstruggleintensified
48 Sun Yat-sen,San Min,pp.4-6.

49 30 June1949, in Selected
Mao Zedong, 'On thePeople's DemocraticDictatorship',
Worksof Mao Tse-tung(Beijing: ForeignLanguagesPress, 1969), vol.4,pp.411-24,
esp.417-18.

withinthehigherpartyand stateapparatus. Bad class elements werehostage

tothefortunes ofarchunrepentant capitalist roaders.50
Havinggivencontent to thenation,thecategory ofclass (likethatof the
nation)becamean essentially contested conceptwithina discourseof state
power.It was thenshownto be as unstableas thecategory of thenation.It
was notsufficient tobe born a peasant or a worker to warrant inclusion among
the 'people', nor was landlordor bourgeoisclass background a sufficient
principleof exclusion.The onlyreliablecriterion forinclusionamongthe
Peoplewas class 'attitude', expressedin theformof support forMao Zedong
himself. In appropriating therightto namethe'people',to represent it andto
speak on its behalf,Mao also reservedthe rightto identify each of its
subsidiary categories.Class, like nation,came in theend to meananything
thatitsself-appointed representatives chosetomakeit.
Mao's approachtothecategory ofsocialclasswas notquiteas cavalieras
it mightappear. Indeed,it was the culmination of a tradition of state
nationalism stretching backto theturnof thecentury in whichstate-builders
reservedtherightto identify who it was thatmadeup thenationand who
exercisedthatrightin waysconsistent withtheirclaimsto statesovereignty.
Conservatives and reformers in the mid-nineteenth century, reformers and
revolutionaries at theturnof thecentury, Nationalists and theirCommunist
rivalsin theearlystagesof China'snationalrevolution all presumed thatthe
nationhad no nameof itsown, all assumed the right to give a name to their
nation, and, in naming it,to represent it as a state.None conceded that there
mightalreadyhavebeena nationin existencecapableof representing itself.
When the Communists drew theirline beyondrace and traditional high
culture,and isolatedclass as theessentialfeature of thenation,theydid not
reachbeyondthelimitsofnationalist thought itself.All theydidwas movethe
linea littlefurther inthedirection ofthestate.
The pointat issue hereis notthe existenceof social classes in early
twentieth-century China,nor even the salienceof class analysisin social
revolution. It is, rather,themannerin whichtheidea of class tookrootin
state-oriented nationalism.Class firstenteredthe vocabularyof radical
activistsaroundtheturnof thecentury alongwithall thatwas modemand
cosmopolitan. Reference to a revolution of social classes was commonplace
amonganarchists whowerenotin theleastconcerned aboutthereunification
of the stateand who wereonlymarginally interested in the attainment of
50 Thedistinction between in theliteral

classstruggle peopleofbadclass
sense(against
background) andin themetaphorical sense(againstpeoplewhofollowed thewrong
political'line') wastenuousat thebestof times, maintained
butwas nevertheless in
ordertogive'line'struggle socialreferent.
a significant Revolution
In theCultural this
distinctionbecametheaxisoffactional within
struggle theRedGuardmovement itself.
in CantonSchools,
Unger,EducationUnderMao: Class and Competition
See Jonathan
(NewYork:Columbia
1960-1980 Press,1982),pp.122-33.
University

national'wealthand power'.5'China'searlychampions of social revolution

employedclass analysisin thehopeof identifying socialforceswhichmight
eliminate It was theethicalcommunity
thestateentirely. ofthenation,notof
socialclass,whichrequired theclearestelaborationand closest justificationin
earlyrevolutionary thought.Social classeswerethought to exist in thenatural
orderof things.The nation,on theotherhand,appearedan irrational and
contrivance
artificial born of the system.52
state
international Nevertheless, the
anarchists'pioneering conception of theworldcommunity as an aggregation
of socialclassesmadepossiblea radicalreconfiguration ofthenationitselfas
a classcommunity whenthetimewasripe.
Amongnationalists, on the otherhand,it is easy to overestimate the
appeal of Marxistsocialism.Therewas in factan immensereluctanceto
embracethe idea of class divisionand class strugglewithinnationalist
thought. Divisivesocialrevolutionwas thoughttoaccompany someotherkind
of revolution thanthenationalone plannedforChina.So thefirst Nationalist
to embraceMarxisttheory,Hu Hanmin,was happyto apply historical
materialism to thedevelopment of Confucianethicsbutsaw littlemeritin
extending hisanalysisto thesocial,economicandpoliticallifeofthecountry
because'historicalmaterialism' was predicatedon socialviolence.53 Like his
leaderin theNationalist Party,Sun Yat-sen,Hu maintained thatthePrinciple
of People's Livelihood offeredan adequate substitutefor historical
materialism in theChineserevolution becauseattention to thelivelihoodof
thecommonpeoplewouldpre-empt thedevelopment ofclassstruggle.54
Few nationalrevolutionaries outsidetheNationalist Partyfavouredthe
either.The Nationalist
idea of class struggle Party'sauthority on Comintern
thinking,Henk Sneevliet,had shown little inclinationto exclude the
Indonesianbourgeoisie fromthenationalist program on an earlierassignment
in theDutchIndies,andSneevlietdoes notappearto haveraisedtheprospect
51 Bernal,
Martin Socialism
Chinese Cornell
to1907(Ithaca: Press,1976);Peter
University
Zarrow,Anarchismand ChinesePolitical Culture(New York: ColumbiaUniversity
Press, 1990); Dirlik and Chan, Schools into Fields and Factories.Note especially
Dirlik'schapteron ethicsinAnarchismintheChineseRevolution.
52 EvenZhangBinglin, one of theforemostnationalist of theturnof the
theoreticians
century,consideredthenationarbitraryandaccidental: 'Now,in thismultitudinous
universe, ofriceina vastgranary,
is buta smallgrain
theearth yettoday[we]wholive
weprotect
on it havedivideditup intoterritories, whatis oursandcallita "nation".
Thenwe established divided[ourselves]
institutions, classes,andcalledit
intovarious
"government"'. Nationsand stateswere'determined by happenstance'and had no
other
rationale thantheir emergence
historical fororganising
as categories of
theaffairs
men.CitedinPeter Zarrow, pp.51-2
Anarchism,
53 Joseph Levenson, ConfucianChina and its Modem Fate: A Trilogy(Berkeley:
ofCalifornia
University vol.3,pp.28-30.
Press),
54 SunYat-sen,
SanMin,p.380ff.

of targeting theChinesebourgeoisiein his discussionswithSun Yat-sen.55

Sneevlietwas of coursea partialand partisansourceon Comintem thinking
abouttheplace of class struggle in nationalrevolutionary movements. The
morebrazenIndianComintem delegate,M. N. Roy,advocatedclass struggle
againstthe Indianbourgeoisie.But in Moscow Roy made littleheadway
againstLenin,and even withintheIndiannationalist movement his impact
was limited.56 Nor weremanyChineseCommunists persuadedat theoutset
thatclass struggleagainstChina's traders, or landlordshad a
industrialists
significant partto play in a war of nationalliberation. WhenLi Dazhao
transferred thedomainofclass struggle to thearenaofinternational relations,
withChinaplayingthepartof theproletariat, he was fullyconsciousthathis
formulaic adaptation of thematerialist conception of history minimized the
prospectof class strugglein China's own revolution. In fact,thiswas the
wholepointoftheexercise.Therewas littleincentive foreitherNationalist or
Communist Partytheorists torelinquishthemodemidealoftheunified nation
orto abandontheinherited Confucian idealofsocialharmony untilbothideals
had beenrendered untenable within nationalist thought itself.In thisrespect,
exaggeratingthe appeal of Marxismto nationalistsonly obscuresthe
significance of whattookplace withinnationalist thought overthetwenty or
thirtyyearsleadingtotheestablishment ofthePeople'sRepublic.
Marxism-Leninism becamea plausibleoptionwithinnationalist thought
onlyafterclass struggle ceasedtopresent an obstacletoitsacceptance. Hence
theestablishment of a rationaleanda rhetorical framework forinserting class
struggleintonationalism was themostsignificant development of China's
nationalrevolution. This tookplace,we noted,in threephases.In theMay
FourthMovement,class strugglewas analogousto the struggleamong
nations,and betweenwealthierand stronger statesand the territories they
soughtto bringintotheircolonialempires.From1922,class struggle against
'feudal' military forceswas also conceivedas a nation-building enterprise
withinChina,promoting thehistoricalevolution ofa uniformly nationalmode
of production. And from1925 throughout theperiodof thecivil war,the
reluctance of certainpowerful andwell-organized groupsin societyto follow
thedirectives oftherevolutionaries singledthemoutforclass struggle as well,
againin thenameof savingthestate.In thiscase, advocacyofclass struggle
againstthebourgeoisie andthelandlord classesservedthefurther function of
destroying the only social formations thatheld any prospectof staging
effectivelocalresistance toan expanding party-state.
The institutionof theparty-state was crucialto thisdevelopment. The
Communistand NationalistParties saw themselvesas institutions for
'representing' thenationalpeopleuntiltheyhadcameto a realization of their
own unitv(as race or as class) throughnoliticalstruL1leand nolitical
55 TonySaich,TheOriginsoftheFirstUnitedFrontin China:TheRoleofSneevliet(alias
Maring)(Leiden:E. J.Brill,1991).
56 See Seth,'MarxismandtheQuestionofNationalism'.

education.Those who persistedin displayingindifference to imperialist

influence ordisregard forpoliticalpartitionunderwarlord rule,despiteample
warning,betrayedin theirbehaviourthattheybelongedto the counter-
revolutionary 'class'. The idea of class strugglethenceased to be an
unpalatableoptionin nationalist thoughtand came to appear,instead,a
palatable necessity.57 If the people themselveswere divided over the
fundamental issueofwhoshouldrulethemandhowtheyshouldbe ruled,then
onlysomeofthemdeservedtobe includedamongthepeopleofthenation.So
Marxismmadepossiblea radicalre-imagining ofthenationalselfin termsof
class: class offered a rationalprinciple forexclusionfromthenationof those
socialgroupsresisting theexpansion oftherevolutionary state.
Nevertheless, theappearanceof class struggle in therevolution did not
signal its departure fromnationalism nor transform the revolution into a
socialistenterprise. The disputeassociatedwithclass struggletook place
withinnationalist thought thelimitsof an established
itself,testing consensus
on thecomposition of thenationand forcing a massiverupture in nationalist
thought betweena continuing commitment to Sun Yat-sen'svisionof the
nationas 'race' and an alternative visionof thenationdefinedby class. The
questionat issue,in Chatterjee's terms,was howto essentializethenational
self.Ideologicaldifferences whichdividedtheNationalists and Communists
in theChinesenationalrevolution arethenbestcharacterized notas a struggle
betweenMarxism-Leninism and nationalism,but as a struggle betweentwo
phasesof nationalism, or moreparticularly betweentwohighlycompetitive
state-building partiesoverthecontent of thenationandtheformof thestate
thatwouldacttorepresent it.
Conclusion
A schematic analysisofthekindoffered hererunstheriskofignoring all that
Winnersappearto gain a moralvictory;losersnot
is accidentalin history.
onlylose power,butseemtolose theplotas well.YettheChinesenationneed
not have been definedalong the statistlines oulinedabove, nor need the
identityof thenationhavebeenlinkedwithclass in quitethisfashion.There
in Chineseanarchism
was, we noted,a strainof socialistthought whichwas
notpreoccupied wealthandpower.So,
withquestionsofnationalsovereignty,
too,therewas a Chinesepeoplelongbeforenationalists beganlamenting the
failureof thepeopleto coherein quitethewaytheywanted.The nationsof
citizen,raceandclass maywellhavebeeninventions ofthestatedesignedto
overcomedifferences dividingthepeopleofChina,butthesedifferences have
7 The slogansandpostersadvocating'class struggle'in Guangzhouin the1920sdeclared

notthatclass strugglewas gloriousbutthat'class struggleis inevitable'.See Edward
KennethW. Rea (ed.), Cantonin Revolution:The CollectedPapers of Earl Swisher,
1925-1928(Boulder:WestviewPress,1977),p.32.

all along been mediatedby a commonagreement amongindividualsand

communities thattheyhappentobelongtogether, aftera fashion.
The manypeoplewho live in Chinahave a longhistory of theirown,
preservednot in recordsof statebut in immenserepositories of cultural
memory thatis captured in storyandsong,festival andritual,streetnewsand,
today,on televisionand film.RichardMadsenhas recently called forthe
application of a new kindof politicalsociologymoresensitiveto modelsof
community consciousness outsideofthestatist framework - in contests over
written histories, in commemorative ceremonies, operaand literature,and in
theimmensestorehouse of collectivememory, to serveas a corrective to the
stateorientation of muchpoliticalscholarship.58 The reasonsfordoingso are
more thanacademic.The relationship betweenstateand nationis under
negotiation inChinatodaytoan extent thatdefiesall precedent.
It is notjustthatofficialconfigurations ofthenationareunderchallenge.
True,thenationalflagsofthePeople'sRepublicofChinaandoftheRepublic
of Chinaon Taiwanno longersignify thenationand politiestheyrepresent.
On Taiwan,thenationalflagand nationalanthem of theRepublicstillmake
explicitreference to theNationalist Partyat a timewhenthestateis moving
towarda multi-party system. The flag,withitsNationalist Partyinsigniaof a
blueskyandwhitesunon thecanon,andtheanthem referringtothenationas
'our party'(wu dang),bothrecalltheoriginsof thestatein thesingle-party
Nationalist statefromwhichTaiwanis gradually movingawayon a raftof
politicalreforms thatareleavingbothpartyandflagbehind.On themainland,
theflagof thePeople's Republicbetraysitsoriginsin thestate-orchestrated
class strugglesof the Communistrevolution.With four small stars
representing the 'revolutionary' social classes of thenation,all orbiting the
greaterstarof theCommunist stateat thecentreof thecanon,theflagof the
People's Republicsignifies notonlythevictory oftheclasseswhichcomprise
thenationbutalso,by theiromission, thedefeatof thecounter-revolutionary
classes whichneverquitemade it ontothe flag.As earlyas the Cultural
Revolution, whenthe'classes' starred on theflagwereencouraged to wage
star-wars amongthemselves, a generation of schoolchildrenwas taughtto
honourthe flagwithout beingtoldwhatit was theyweresaluting.59 More
recently, thecommitment to thepoliticsof class struggle whichonce guided
the selectionof starsis at odds withtheethicof getting-rich-quick which
underpins theeconomicreform program ofDengXiaoping.Thebigstaris still
in the ascendant,but the flag's selectiveassemblageof social classes
heightens theasymmetry betweenstateand nationby reminding thosewho
58 RichardMadsen,'The PublicSphere,Civil Societyand MoralCommunity: A Research

Agenda forContemporary China Studies',Modem China,vol.19, no.2 (April 1993),
pp.183-98.
59 W. J.F. Jenner,
The TyrannyofHistory:TheRootsof China's Crisis(Harmondsworth:
PenguinPress,1992),p.66.

salutetheflag(and knowwhattheyare saluting)thattheParty'sideological

foundations no longermatchthedirection inwhichthecountry is heading.
Moreimportantly, wherethestateshouldturnto finditsnationandwhat
shapethenationwillassumeon theflagdependsto a greater degreethanever
beforeon thecompliance the
of people of Chinain the
forfeiting right toname
themselves. Indeed,itis notsimplytheshapeoftheflagthatis at issuetoday
but the fundamental premisethatthe statereservestherightto definethe
nationand to specifyits relationshipto thestate.In thehistoryof Chinese
nationalismthe state (or state-builders)have assumedthis rightwithout
question.To theextentthatthelinebetweenstateandnationhasbeenblurred,
and thatlove of country fromlove of thestate,
has been indistinguishable
China's intellectualshave tendedto go along withit all. As Fang Lizhi
recalledin 1989,
I remember inmyyounger daysjoininginon thecriticism ofourpoorold teachers,
who wouldalwaysdefendthemselves by saying'At leastI'm patriotic;at leastI
love my country'.Our standardreplywas 'But whatcountrydo you love7 A
communist country7or a Kuomintang country?' Of coursewhatwe wereimplying
was thattheyweren'treallypatrioticat all. In thiscontext,
patriotismobviously
does notmeanlovingyournativeplace,yourrivers, yoursoil,yourcities;itmeans
lovingthestate.60
FangLizhi's ironicself-parody highlightsa revolutionary development in
contemporary China.Patrioticnationalism has takenrootoutsidethe state
itself.In thepoliticalreformmovements whichfollowedimmediately on the
CulturalRevolution, reform was understood to meanrestoring theideological
faithof a jaded community, thesheenof a tarnished
or restoring party.More
recently,however,this restorationist tendencyhas yielded to a wider
recognition betweentheCommunist
of thedistinction Partyand thestate,on
theone hand,andbetweenthestateandthenationon theother.6' Distinctions
of thiskindmakeroomfora conception of a nationand fora formof state
quitedifferentfromanywhichhavecomebeforein China.Thisrevolutionary
developmentdoes not, paradoxically, requirea politicalrevolution:the
revolutionary discourseof the'nationlessstate'has littletractionin a nation
whichis sufficiently confidentto nameitself,and in a statewhichdoes not
presumetotellthepeopleofChinawhotheyare.
September 1994
Melbourne
60 Fang Lizhi, 'On Patriotismand Global Citizenship',speech of 25 February1989,

by JamesH Williams,in GeorgeHicks
by G. K. Sun, translated
Beijing;transcribed
(ed.), The BrokenMirror:China afterTiananmen(Harlow,Essex: Longman,1990),
pp.xxi-xxv.
61 MerleGoldman,PerryLinkandSu Wei, 'China'sIntellectuals in theDeng Era: Loss of
withtheState',in Lowell Ditmerand SamuelS. Kim (eds), China's Questfor
Identity
(Ithaca:CornellUniversity
NationalIdentity Press,1993),pp.125-53.


College of Asia and The Pacific, The Australian National University Australian National University

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

College of Asia and The Pacific, The Australian National University Australian National University

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University

Australian National University

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Thesepeopleareso shameless andso quickof handthatat anytimetheycan

The historyof modemChina,in theround,is recounted as a strugglefor

I Wuchanjieji yu wuyejieji [The Property-less Class], in Li

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

extraordinarily abruptand violentmomentsof transition fromone state

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Nationalism,Socialismand NationalLiberationin Comparative

Theda Skocpol,Statesand Social Revolutions:A ComparativeAnalysisof France,

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Identifying this nationalself is one of the functionsof nationalist

6 and theColonialWorld:A DerivativeDiscourse

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

distinguish betweenthe'national'cultureand thatof theWest'is combined

9 Dipesh Chakrabarty, 'Towardsa Discourseon Nationalism',Economicand Political

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

China.Mass resistance wouldhavewaitedinvainfora stablecolonialstatein

l Perhapsthenearestequivalentto thisphasein Chinawas theanarchist movement. See

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

formalised in treaties,and theirinfluence reachedfarbeyondthe isolated

13 AbdullahLaroui,The CrisisoftheArabIntellectual (Berkeley:Universityof California

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

In so faras NehruandSunYat-senset'thepeopleas nation'inopposition

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

China theState,China theNation

16 Citedin SanjaySeth,'Marxismand theQuestionof Nationalismin a ColonialContext:

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Confucianism did not survivethe transformation of the state,the state

Chinacan remainChinaor 'CentralNation'as longas she does notcommunicate with

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

reflected thenationwas to be discoveredin theact of savingthestate:the

21 LiangQichao,'Zhongguojiruosuyuanlun' [On theSourceofChina'sWeakness],1900,

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

'conceptual'error'lodgedin everyperson'sbrain'.The act of namingthe

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

nu). The peopleof China,however,wouldnotevenbe preserved as slaves

27 Sun Yat-sen,San Min,pp.12,38. On Sun's concernwithetiquette,

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Othershelddifferent notionsof whatthethreat ofthe'deathofthestate'

Lifu,put forwarda plan forcompulsoryinstructionin Chinesescriptforall minority

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

consistedof all those who loved theirstate.Once patriotism had been

abilityof conscious,activemento shapeevents'was a radicaldeparture

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

It is customary to go aboutanalysing therelationship betweenMarxism

4 See KarlMarxandFrederick Engels,CollectedWorks1845-48(London:Lawrenceand

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

theoryandracialnationalism, itoffered usefulinsights forstate-buildersintent

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

regionsalong cultural,social or ethnicboundaries.For example,while

35 Chen Duxiu, 'Lianshengzizhi yu Zhongguozhengxiang'[The FederalSystemand

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

oftheunityof thenationalpeoplewhichthepeoplethemselves couldnotyet

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

the foreignconcessionat home or in colonial societiesabroad.39Many

39 See my'TheIronyof theChineseRevolution:

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

for distinguishing friendsand enemies in the Chinese revolution.Its

This content downloaded on Sat, 16 Feb 2013 12:19:44 PM

Marxism,Nationalismand theClass Nation