Anarchism and Chinese Political Culture by Peter Zarrow Review by: Robert Ferrell Philosophy East and West,

Vol. 45, No. 1 (Jan., 1995), pp. 131-133 Published by: University of Hawai'i Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1399516 . Accessed: 06/05/2012 09:43
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.

University of Hawai'i Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy East and West.

http://www.jstor.org

Nadin's prioritiesare clear. If minds are to be nurtured,education should not be burdenedby excessive emphasison the actual conditions of society. Thereshould be a shield of some kindbetween what happens in schools and the pressuresand political surges of everyday life. "No doubt, education needs exchange with society, but a selective barrier will ensure proper conditions for mind constitution.... A balance between how we supportrepresentation-oriented functions (in particular, problem solving), constitutivefunctions (on which the creation of new values rests),and communicationwould allow education to play a role that goes beyond servicingneeds" (p. 160). Itwould still providefor society's wants, but it would also attend to the demands of an inquisitive life, which for the individualis always the point. Note I would like to acknowledge the large contributionof Scott Duncanson to the final draftof this essay. What startedout as editorial assistance turnedinto many hoursof conversationabout the philosophicalissues it involves.

Anarchismand Chinese PoliticalCulture.By PeterZarrow. New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1990. A hint at some of this book's charm is to be found in the preface.With a bit of self-conscious self-searching,ProfessorZarrowquestions his own amounts motivationforthis research.His somewhat ironicdetermination to a summaryof the book. That is, traditionalSinologistshave usually found the anarchistmovementto be of marginalimportance.This work is a responseto that notion which finds the anarchistmovementto be of great importance, especially in intellectual preparation for radical change. The authorasks three majorquestions. How did anarchismfit Chinese political discourse?What was its relationto into contemporary Neo-Confucianism?And, why did these anarchists usually turn conservative? The book's main themes relatedto anarchismare: utopianism,revolutionarytheory, feminism, and nationalism.The author begins with of Taoism. backgroundmaterialrelatinganarchismto the traditionalism He then traces the rise of the two major movements of Chinese exiles and students in Tokyo and Paris.Subsequently,he traces these moveof 1911. In mentsand theiradherentsthroughtheirrole in the Revolution succeeding chapters,he traces the latercareersof these anarchists,their changed perspectives,their influence in the 1910s and 1920s, their relationto Mao, and theirsources.
Reviewedby RobertFerrell of Texas University at ElPaso

? 1995

of by University Hawaii Press Book Reviews

131

section to explain his interest The authorattemptsin his introductory in anarchismin China.This reviewer,too, found an inexpressible feeling of anarchismin China, a supposed totalitarian state, where the policemen more often wear sandals, not bulletproofvests. ProfessorZarrow only refers obliquely to an alleged anarchist undergroundin today's China,but he deals at lengthwith the anarchiststrainresonantwith ageold Taoism. The Taoist tradition,while allowing minimalgovernment, has a clear parallelwith the anarchismof the modern era. While this anarchismlatent in Taoism is not the bomb-throwing, activist type, as seen in Europe, the attitudesof these Taoistphilosophersclearly rejected from journalarcoercive authority.The authordraws his interpretation ticles by David L. Hall and RogerT. Ames. Zhuangzi's point of view is even more pronounced than that of Laozi. His calling the feudal lords"the biggestthieves" is reminiscentof the pronouncementsof such Europeans as Proudhon.Not only did the Taoistcontribution to Chinese consciousness provide a rejectionof aubut it providedan image of the individualas only develthoritarianism, oping naturallyif free. Modern Chinese anarchistsbegan as a minorityof exiled activists and youth in Tokyoand Paris.What had begun as a responseto Western encroachment,to the decline of the Qing dynasty,and to setbacksin the movement of 1907 grew steadily. By 1919, the anarchist revolutionary persuasion probably representedthe focus of attention for educated Chinese youth, according to the author. These theories were no less for change, plausibleor utopianthen thanthe othercompetingprograms such as republicanism or communism. of an anarchist straininTaoism,the first Despitethe traditional heritage modern anarchistsin China were educated as Confucians.Various reformistproposalscame into prominencewith the breakdownof imperial Anarchywas inlegitimacythat set the stage for anarchistradicalization. troducedintoChinaby bourgeoisreformers and revolutionaries as a product of Westernthought.The authorsurveysthe varioushistoriographical withinChinaandwithout,inwhich Chineseanarchism is seen approaches, as transitional, or the various traditions. destructive, marginal by scholarly In subsequentchapters,Professor Zarrowtraces the lives of the first few modernChinese anarchistsin exile in Tokyo and Paris.The influential basis for utopian visions and social analysis is examined in detail. Chinese anarchistsin Parisand Tokyo adapted the ideas of European anarchists such as Kropotkin and JeanGraveto the unique needs of their homeland. Many of them saw the Marxistsocialists as the least revolutionarymovement at this time. One anarchist,LiuShipei, even worked out plans for a peasant revolutionmany years before Mao. Liubelieved anarchismto be consistentwith world progress,particularly the increase
PhilosophyEast& West in general scientific knowledge, and believed China, with its long history

132

of Confucian and Taoist theories of noninterference,to be uniquely suited for anarchism.These Chinese anarchistsin Pariswere decidedly intellectualswho had hope for the future antiviolentand antimilitaristic in education, progress,and evolution. Along with the other revolutionaryand reformistideas, these few anarchistexiles took up the ideas of women's liberationand anarchofeminismwith enthusiasmas well. Continuinghis patternof looking in the authorgoes detailatthe ideasof these earlymodernanarchist thinkers, intodetailquotingand describingthe thoughtof He Zhen,who hadfled to Tokyo with Liu. He, togetherwith Li Shizeng, examined the past, Confucianism,family,and sexualityto detail the historyof male dominance. Beginning with footbinding, the Chinese feminist movement, tied with the anarchists,progressedto rejectingpolygamy and, finally, filial of these views piety, legal marriage,and the family itself. Consideration led to the assertionby He Zhen that men could not achieve a meaningful political economic revolutionwithouta concurrentwomen's revolution. Thus, Chinese cultureand society were to come underconsiderationby the anarchistsin search of means for change. The anarchistschanged their tone afterthe revolutionof 1911, applying their ideas to the nationalistgovernmentand puttingtheir hopes in a practicaland progressive future.The authorarguesthatthe anarchist move to the rightin the 1920s was a logical outgrowthof their original and position ratherthan a reactionaryswing. They preferredKropotkin Bakuninto Marx.Theirsupportof the Guomindangmeant that desires for social reform and modernization would be eclipsed by anticommunism.After1949, many joined the partywhile others, including many of those examined by the author, left mainlandChina. The wellknown writer, Ba Jin, whose very name came from anarchistsources, ultimately allowed anarchist references to be purged from his work underthe Communistgovernment. Ultimately, the anarchist philosophies disappeared under Mao. strainin the earlywritingof Mao,and Thoughthe authorfindsan anarchist the Russians madethischargeinthe 1970s, therewere basiccontradictions between Maoismand any philosophicanarchismin Chinaafterliberation. In the final chapter, Professor Zarrowanalyzes the sources and significanceof Chinese anarchism.He findsthe Chinese case unique in not or originalsin and the accombeing shackledto romanticindividualism over the panying religious anguish question of human goodness. After the different sources and analyzing conceptual differencesof the Tokyo and Parisgroups, Professor Zarrowturnsto the significance of Chinese anarchism.Here, he allows for mixed opinions. Althoughthey failed on the surface,many of theiroriginalproposalswere laterfound acceptable, and their ideas remain on record to inspirethose who see the highest BookReviews humangoal to be a combinationof libertyand equality. 133