Comment on Looking Back to Look Forward: Geopolitics, Identity, and Engaging China
D a recent visit to a local bookstore, I stumbled upon a monograph by the Chinese scholar Zhang Weiwei (Zhang, 2012). It would have been easy to overlook among the voluminous literature seeking to make sense of China’s much-debated ascendancy in the international arena. Entitled The China Wave, it follows many other works focusing on the exceptionalism of the Asian state, signaling its upward trajectory as a unique (albeit important) global actor. However, what really attracted my attention was the front cover, which boasts sales of one-half million copies of its Chinese edition, making it one of most popular books in China in 2011. Turning to the preface, the author explains that the book was originally intended for a Chinese audience, and the purpose for translating it is to enable the “West” to “emancipate the mind and learn a little more about or from China’s approach and the Chinese ideas, however extraneous they may appear, for its own benefit” (Zhang, 2012, p. xi). Indeed, in the subsequent pages, Zhang proceeds to qualify his claim; by positing China as a civilizational state amalgamating modern state structures with distinct traditions and features originating from its civilization, Zhang argues that there are eight historically embedded ideas that the state follows in charting its developmental pathway. He concludes that this set of political discourses raises questions about many commonplace assumptions of democracy, good governance, as well as human rights, and that “the West may actually gain from China’s rise of power and ideas, just as many developing or transitional economies have done” (Zhang, 2012, p. ix). Zhang’s thesis confirms John Agnew’s (2012) observation that there has been no lack of voices within China reflecting on the country’s positioning in world politics. Indeed, Zhang’s work seems to fall under Agnew’s narrative of “international relations theory with Chinese characteristics.” Rather than suggesting the existence of a singular Chinese (meta)narrative, Agnew traces the genealogies of four different geopolitical themes prevalent in China, to demonstrate how such (selective) histories and geographies have been revived (at different junctures) to envisage the country’s geopolitical futures. Agnew’s intent is neither to privilege these Chinese accounts as necessarily more authentic nor uphold an essentialist view that there are fundamental ideas intrinsic to the existing Chinese polity (which Zhang’s writings seem to connote). Rather, Agnew’s contribution lies in his exposition of how China’s past has been mobilized by intellectuals and politicians alike to provide justifications for the pursuit of particular foreign policy agendas. Accordingly, as opposed to Zhang’s lofty proclamations of the value of Chinese modes of thinking for different societies, Agnew appears more concerned with gaining insight into the mindsets and practices of these Chinese political actors given China’s status as an emerging world power.
The China Wave:Rise of a Civilizational State
This is a best-seller in China and a geopolitical book for our times. As a leading thinker from China, Zhang Weiwei provides an original, comprehensive and engrossing study on the rise of China and its effective yet controversial model of development, and the book has become a centerpiece of an unfolding debate within China on the nature and future of the world's most populous nation and its possible global impact. China's rise, according to Zhang, is not the rise of an ordinary country, but the rise of a different type of country, a country sui generis, a civilizational state, a new model of development and a new political discourse which indeed questions many of the Western assumptions about democracy, good governance and human rights. The book is as analytical as it is provocative, and should be required reading for everyone concerned with the rise of China and its global implications.
The Illinois Legislature
It further provides that the county must have voted "for license" at the last general election on that subject. Also, that the petition, together with all names and addresses on it, must first be published in at least two issues of some newspaper published in the town where the petition was circulated, for at least ten days before the petition is acted upon. Any officer authorized to issue licenses violating the provisions of this act is liable to a fine of from $500 to $1000 and imprisonment in the county jail for from two to twelve months. The act does not repeal any local laws forbidding the sale of liquor, but is cumulative to all anti-liquor laws now in force. The final section is: "This Act being necessary for the public peace, health, and safety, shall take effect and be in force from and after December 31, 1913." The postponement of the time for going into effect was made io order not to interfere with licenses already issued and to give the liquor dealers time to adjust themselves to the provisions of the act. But the liquor people denied that the emergency clause could be attached to an act the operation of which was postponed nearly a year. They called attention to the omission of the word "immediate," and declared that the postponement was in itself sufficient evidence that it was not necessary for the "immmediate preservation of the public health, peace and safety." A petition for reference was circulated and the necessary number of signatures was secured. The attorney-general was first asked for his opinion as to whether the act was subject to the referendum. That officer stated that he could find no precedent for such a case. Basing his decision on reason and common sense he declared the act not subject to the referendum. The circuit court was then asked for a write of mandamus against the secretary of state to compel him to submit the act, but the court refused to grant it, saying that the attachment of the emergency clause was evidence that the legislature intended to prevent its submission. At this writing the question is pending on appeal before the supreme court.