China is not alone in building a new cult of heroes and martyrs
It symbolizes the ambitious and far-reaching campaign launched by the Chinese state to revive the country's pantheon of national heroes and martyrs. The aim is to unite and mobilize the nation in what the Chinese leadership sees as the crucial final phase in the quest to become a modern global superpower.
On the same day as the Wuhan competition, but 750 miles farther inland in Sichuan province, children from a kindergarten gathered with martyrs' family members to engage in traditional crafts. The official newspaper of the Chinese Communist party, the People's Daily, explained how this activity helped 'pass on the torch of heroes' to young generations.
And two weeks earlier, in China's eastern province of Shandong, representatives from the official state news agency, Xinhua, attended an immersive training session on hero spirit. By coming 'face to face' with heroes of the past, the trainees were able to grasp the 'spirit' that had guided the extraordinary deeds of these ordinary people.
This 'facing up' to past heroes increasingly takes place through digital means. Thanks to developments in AI, and with the help of universities, museums and various government units, numerous Chinese people have now been 'reunited' or become 'acquainted' with family members martyred decades ago.
Activities such as these have become commonplace in recent years. They are encouraged, guided and overseen by an expanding architecture of laws and regulations. There are at least two reasons why the campaign to build a new 'spirit' of heroism and sacrifice requires attention beyond China-watchers. A boy places flowers on a monument at the Shanghai Longhua Martyrs Cemetery. Photo: Alex Plavevski / EPA
The first reason is the increasingly global reach of the campaign. Just as China's economic statecraft is affecting global trade and finance, so too are Chinese memory politics spreading across the globe and reshaping the transnational memory landscape.
Beijing has become an active sponsor of commemorations that are concerned more with shaping the future than looking into the past. Recent examples include Victory Day celebrations in Moscow and Minsk, and joint commemorations in the Serbian capital, Belgrade, of the Chinese 'martyrs' of Nato's bombing of the Chinese embassy there in 1999.
China is also fostering bilateral memory partnerships in south-east Asia and Africa. And it has even resorted to memory diplomacy in seeking improved relations with the US by invoking the spirit of Sino-US cooperation during the second world war.
China's historical statecraft operates globally in the legal realm, too. Laws have come into effect that aim to promote patriotism and spread 'core socialist values' among Chinese communities worldwide.
Chinese embassies and consulates are required to locate Chinese martyrs buried in their host jurisdictions and to erect and maintain memorials for them. They are also expected to organize commemorations involving local Chinese diasporic and expat communities.
Recent laws have been used to detain Chinese citizens living abroad. One example is Chinese artist Gao Zhen. Gao had been a permanent US resident for 13 years when he was detained in China in 2024 for his critical depictions of Mao Zedong a decade earlier.
Gao was charged with the crime of 'slandering China's heroes and martyrs' under a law that did not exist when he created and exhibited his artwork. Other countries, including traditional democracies, have also sought to shape and control historical memory. Phot: Will Oliver / EPA
The second reason why China's martyrs and heroes campaign matters globally is possibly more disturbing. China has become an example of a growing body of cases in which state actors seek to shape and control historical memory.
With several democracies beginning to show signs of democratic backsliding, the Chinese case is one of many that show that polar distinctions between 'liberal' and 'illiberal' systems are untenable.
Perhaps the most obvious example of a democracy in democratic recession is the US. Donald Trump, a constitutionally elected president, is relying on a series of executive orders to consolidate power and hamper critical debate.
One such directive, issued late in Trump's first term, entails a proposal to build a so-called 'national garden of American heroes.' The proposal was revived recently with an executive order on 'restoring truth and sanity to American history.'
The order aims to remove what the administration deems divisive and anti-American ideologies from national museums and public monuments.
Washington's efforts to control how history is presented seem to come straight out of Beijing's playbook. In 2020, during his July 4 address, Trump claimed: 'Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values and indoctrinate our children.'
These words eerily resemble those used previously by Chinese president Xi Jinping to justify his campaign against what he calls 'historical nihilism' – attempts to 'destroy' the Chinese nation by eradicating its history.
Memory laws have also been adopted across Europe. The European Parliament, for example, has codified its own historical interpretations of the causes of the Second World War in an attempt to counter what it labels Russian disinformation.
The causes and consequences of war have always been and will continue to be hotly debated among historians, and there is no need for the EU's bureaucracy to unilaterally 'resolve' these debates.
A problem with these bureaucratic efforts to codify historical interpretation is that they feed memory wars and fuel escalation. Even more damaging is that they emulate authoritarian practices of 'dictating' history and restricting debate.
These examples show that distinctions between authoritarian and democratic regimes are not as pristine as is often claimed. Increasingly, global memory practices are evolving and possibly converging on a fluid spectrum between these two poles.
China's new hero cult is an important case for shedding light on these dynamics.
Vincent K.L. Chang is an assistant professor of the history and international relations of modern China at Leiden University.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong education chief puts onus on schools amid competition for students
Hong Kong's education minister has said that schools struggling with insufficient student enrolment must evaluate their own performance in meeting parents' expectations rather than relying on government intervention. Advertisement Secretary for Education Christine Choi Yuk-lin also said the education sector should not insist on keeping the existing number of schools and emphasised a need for 'metabolism' to ensure its vitality. In an interview with local media last Friday, she said that the recent policy allowing schools that managed to operate four Form One classes to apply to run one more in the coming academic year was to 'address parents' needs and choice'. Choi urged those schools with insufficient enrolment to reflect on their own performance, instead of simply hindering the development of more popular institutions. 'Schools finding it difficult to admit students throughout many years could not address parents' and students' needs. Why do they define themselves as weak schools and only ask authorities to take care of them? It should not be like this,' she said. Advertisement 'Have they thought about the needs of the parents in their districts? What are the students' needs and what could they provide for them and get their votes for the schools?'
AllAfrica
3 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Chinese pressure stresses Taiwan's democracy
Internationally, Taiwan is mostly celebrated for its success in building a liberal political system despite the persistent threat of PRC military attack. 'Taiwan's democracy Is thriving in China's shadow,' we read; 'resilient,' 'robust' and 'vibrant,' 'a triumph.' But Taiwan's political system has been in crisis since the 2024 elections. The two major parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and the Democratic Progress Party (DPP), accuse each other of threatening Taiwan's hard-won democracy. And that strife is intensified by external danger – a foreign 'black hand,' to borrow a phrase often used by the People's Republic of China (PRC) government. In the elections last year, the independence-leaning DPP maintained the presidency, but lost control of the legislature to a pan-Blue alliance of the KMT and the Taiwan People's Party (TPP, led by former presidential candidate Ko Wen-je, who is now in detention awaiting trial for corruption). Opposition legislators proposed cutting the government's budget. This included reducing funding for defense, despite the fact that the new Trump Administration was calling on Taipei to increase defense spending to justify continued US willingness to intervene in the event of a Chinese attack against Taiwan. KMT legislators also sought to shift the system of checks and balances against the DPP-controlled executive branch in favor of the legislature, including giving the legislature new powers to investigate and prosecute government officials. The KMT argued this was necessary to prevent corrupt behavior in the government, while critics feared the legislature would use these new powers to retaliate against criticism. The changes passed despite complaints by the DPP and tens of thousands of protestors that pan-Blue legislators were rushing the bills into law without adequate transparency. It took Taiwan's Constitutional Court to overrule the changes as in violation of the constitution. The KMT responded by attempting to sideline the Court. Seven of 15 justices finished their terms in October 2024. The KMT got a new law passed that requires a quorum of 10 justices for a valid ruling, then blocked the Lai government's new appointments to the Court. The DDP supported civil society groups in pursuing a campaign to oust KMT legislators through recall votes. The campaign is unprecedented in scope. Up to now, Taiwan has had recall votes for a total of only four legislators in its history, with only one legislator ousted. In July, however, a whopping 24 KMT legislators will face recall voting. Meanwhile, a counter-effort by the KMT to recall 15 DPP legislators appears to have failed. New President Lai Ching-te gets plenty of criticism for the political crisis from Taiwan's pan-Blue opposition, from China, from the US and even from former President Chen Shui-bian, a fellow DPP member. Chen gave a public speech in April, his first in 17 years, arguing that Taiwan's politics have become excessively partisan. Chen said that he disapproves of the recall campaign, that tolerance of contrary opinions is necessary in a democracy, that his party should not stigmatize political opponents as PRC collaborators and that the Lai administration should negotiate with the KMT to allow for effective governance. Chen even suggested that Lai is a dictator who has weaponized Taiwan's judiciary. Lai deserves a share of blame, but not all of it. The single most attention-grabbing anti-China gesture by Lai this year came during his announcement in March of '17 strategies' to counter PRC efforts to influence Taiwan's cross-Strait policy. Lai said the PRC qualifies as a 'hostile overseas force' under Taiwan's Anti-Infiltration Act. That law, passed in 2020 before Lai was president, defines 'hostile overseas forces' as 'countries, political entities or groups' that 'confront us with force' or 'advocate the use of non-peaceful means to endanger the sovereignty of our country.' Since confronting Taiwan with force and threatening to use military violence to prevent Taiwan from formally separating from China are long-standing PRC policies, Lai would seem to be simply stating a fact. Remember also, given the frequent charge that Lai's rhetoric is escalating cross-Strait tensions, that for over two decades the DPP has maintained the position that 'Taiwan is already an independent, sovereign country.' Lai's statements seem neither particularly radical nor ground-breaking. The most valid criticism, perhaps, is that he rejects the idea that accommodating Beijing's sensitivities is necessary to preserve cross-Strait peace. Lai and his advisors believe that the willingness of his predecessor Tsai Ing-wen to take a modestly conciliatory approach toward the PRC only resulted in additional Chinese pressure. Taiwan is a de facto multinational state. Chinese nationalism, which sees Taiwan as part of 'China' (but not necessarily the PRC), contends with Taiwanese nationalism, which sees Taiwan as a separate political entity despite the strong Chinese cultural influence. For the former, Taiwan 'separatism' is treason. To the latter, China is an existential threat. It makes no more sense for PRC officials to call Lai a 'historical criminal' or to castigate him for 'forgetting his roots' than it would make to criticize Americans for not having a monarchy. Democracy is difficult to achieve and difficult to maintain. According to Freedom House, there were no democracies in the world by today's standards as late as the year 1900. (The US and UK were 'electoral autocracies.') Moreover, successful democracies can backslide toward authoritarianism. The quality of democracy in democratic countries has steadily declined over the last two decades. An external military threat makes the task much harder. There is a natural and inescapable tension between upholding civil liberties and ensuring national security when a powerful enemy seeks ways to weaken a state's resilience from within. Taiwan took crucial steps toward democratization in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but that was during the 'million-man swim' era – there was not a realistic prospect of the People's Liberation Army capturing Taiwan by force. The external danger was not strong enough to overwhelm internal demands for political reform. Lai's critics argue that he is using China as an excuse to give his government dictatorial powers. His supporters argue he is taking necessary steps to protect Taiwan from PRC subversion. The important point is that, regardless of the intentions of Lai's actions, they are occurring largely as a result of PRC actions. Even if Lai is acting out of cynical opportunism, China has enabled him. There is no question but that, in addition to exerting concrete military and economic coercion, Beijing is pulling various levers to subvert Taiwan's society toward weakening its resistance to a PRC takeover. Taiwan is an ideal target for United Front operations: a sizeable chunk of the population agrees with the CCP that Taiwan is part of China, and many Taiwanese are reliant on China for their livelihoods, which gives the CPP leverage over them. Some elites in China reportedly are looking to the 1936 Xian Incident as inspiration. In that case, a warlord general aligned with Chiang Kai-shek's KMT government, which was then at war with Mao's Chinese Communist Party forces, arrested Chiang and demanded that he agree to cooperate with the Communists to fight against the invading Japanese in a 'Second United Front' (the first being the Northern Expedition to unify China in 1926—27). The obvious modern parallel to the Xian Incident is China appealing to today's KMT leaders to take action against the DPP government in support of unification. Taiwan's National Security Bureau reports that suspected espionage cases are rising: from 10 in 2022, to 48 in 2023, to 64 in 2024. The Chinese government colludes with organized crime groups on Taiwan, which are traditionally pro-unification. The infamous convicted gang leader Chang An-lo founded the Chinese Unification Promotion Party, repeatedly accused of dispatching gangsters to intimidate opponents of its pro-China agenda. The owner of the China Times Media Group is a Taiwan billionaire who depends heavily on business in China and who says he wants to promote positive views of China. The Group allegedly consults with the PRC government in the shaping of its newspaper and television content presented in Taiwan. China warns other Taiwan businesspeople they must support Beijing's position on Taiwan if they want to keep making money on the Mainland. The PRC government pressures celebrities from Taiwan to make pro-China statements. Chinese sources promote disinformation fed to the Taiwanese public, such as the claim that Taiwan military exercises are actually rehearsals for Taiwan's president and other top officials to flee the island by aircraft in the event a war breaks out. Blue-aligned commentators in Taiwan and PRC propagandists are promoting similar anti-DPP messages. During Taiwan's 2024 election, both groups said a vote for the DPP was a vote for war. Both say Lai is imposing a dictatorship over Taiwan, and both repeat the specific insult of calling Lai's government 'green terror.' The phrase repurposes the term 'white terror,' a reference to the political repression in Taiwan under an authoritarian KMT government during the martial law period. The assassination of 'troublemakers' by the PRC is apparently not off the table. The Czech government recently reported that Chinese diplomats plotted to intentionally crash a vehicle into the car carrying Taiwan's Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim during her visit to Prague last year. It's a valid criticism to charge Lai with imposing his Taiwanese nationalism over the objection of those of his fellow Taiwan citizens who are Chinese nationalists. There is also a risk that Lai's approach makes war more likely, as opposed to an approach that prioritizes peace at the cost of failing to fully satisfy Taiwanese nationalism. Lai may be getting ahead of public opinion, as most Taiwan residents want to retain the status quo of de facto independence but also avoid antagonizing China into taking military action. Beijing, however, deserves the stronger criticism. Its military pressure combined with aggressive efforts to cultivate defeatism effectually supply the rationale for Lai's DPP to pull farther away from Beijing's goal of voluntary unification. Of less concern to Beijing, the growing national security challenge is also straining Taiwan's democracy. Denny Roy is a senior f ellow at the East-West Center.
South China Morning Post
3 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
With bold reform, Hong Kong can embark on new chapter with confidence
The 28th anniversary of Hong Kong's return to China was marked yesterday with ceremony, celebration and much-needed contemplation of the challenges that lie ahead. Hong Kong is at a critical stage of its development. The city has steadily emerged from the anti-government protests of 2019 and the pandemic. A new chapter has begun. Now, it is about seizing opportunities. The word on everyone's lips is reform. Beijing's liaison office chief, Zhou Ji, set the tone , calling on the city to move with the times, focus on people's needs and unleash potential with new ideas. Innovative reform is required, he said. Chief Executive John Lee Ka-chiu reiterated the theme yesterday. He set out achievements made in his first three years in office, including changing the culture of government to one which is 'result-oriented', passing domestic national security laws, tackling the housing shortage and taking steps to revive the economy. Credit is due for the work done. But Hong Kong cannot afford to rest on its laurels. High expectations have been set. With two years of this administration left, Lee must deliver. Bold measures are needed. The structure of the government, inherited from the British, is ripe for reform. Lee has rightly advocated a new accountability system for civil servants. But further and more far-reaching change is needed to boost the government's efficiency.
