China Meets Herself (3): Questions by the Thirty-Plus Generation by Kong Shiu Loon
It is easy to be trapped by public opinion and the media, and develop an image that the Chinese people are selfish and corrupt, craving for easy money, and only caring for enjoyment of the here and now. You would think otherwise by using common sense. People are different. There are far more good people than bad ones in any society, including China.
China had gone through monumental and extraordinarily conflicting experiences in the last seventy years. They had left damages and scars in the people to affect their mental and behavioral needs and expressions. Changing from a closed society to an open one takes a lot of adjustment. Time and education are needed to facilitate and guide the process. As things happened there was no time but only leap-frog progression, largely led by a free strife to get rich. Education did not change much. It stayed controlled by a central authority, based on administrative will rather than wisdom.
Chairman Mao, who ruled China for half a century, did not allow psychology or sociology to be taught in universities, or to function in society. He did not wish to see objective facts about people and society. He did not want others to see either. He decided on what were facts. He had everyone in his control by propagating what was right or wrong, true or false, determined by his decree. There is a popular saying now, that Mao took the grey matter from the brains of his people, and filled them with words; his own.
He left a vacuum of moral and ethical values, as well as any system for revival. He drove everyone down the road of perpetual class struggle, wasting valuable life. Thus, revival and change had become difficult in a new Post-Mao Era. In a country of diverse territorial, economic, and educational conditions, a policy of opening and change could be interpreted and implemented in divergent ways. Without a force of moral values to temper and regulate desires and behaviours, people could just go free and forget responsibility.
China has become rich compared to three decades ago. The dynamic force of personal freedom plus the selling of resources had generated productivity and wealth within a short time. The price is high; financial disparity, injustice, distrust, apathy, deceit, corruption, extravagance, and the breakdown of the family are seen on the surface. Beneath are hurts and bewilderments in the human psych. In addition, individuals who are born as a single child have been deprived of growing up with brothers and sisters. As adults, they have no brood-related relatives to associate with in life, no others to trust and depend on without condition.
Traditional Chinese wisdom sees life as a meaningful, striving, and happy cum fulfilling process. The family is the basic and necessary vehicle (institution) which makes the process smooth, viable and continuing. Confucius said, growing up in a family of three generations offers a child the opportunity to learn to love others by example, and therefore knows his own place in the hierarchy of human relations. At one level are brothers and sisters, older or younger than him. At anther level are parents who love him unconditionally, who also provide examples of how they respect and care for their own parents, as they advance in age. This formed the basis for filial piety in theory as in practice.
These had been refuted and negated in Mao’s China, replaced by the abstract concepts of society and class. Even community, which is more concrete and personal, had been dismissed. Then, the more felt and understood groupings of family, village, neighborhood, school, club, team, and circles of friends were infused with distrust and struggle, reducing them into mere cohorts of lone individuals. By so doing Mao had succeeded to ready people to be governed by him, showing blind loyalty and absolute obedience, reinforced by fear.
He divided people into classes, not social classes as understood in sociology, but groupings of people identified by whatever family conditions and ideological markings that the authority made. Thus, people were divided into a dichotomy, as pro-revolutionaries or anti-revolutionaries. Those designated as the latter were marked as class-enemy. They could be treated by any random cruelty with no justification needed.
The fate of the pro-revolutionaries was no better. Evidence had shown that anyone could have his/her status changed, and assigned to the opposite group, to become “the people’s enemy” or “a class enemy”. Whatever the case may be, he would be dealt with severely by people in power, who were, sometimes, an excited mob. During the normal years and days, people in this group worked and existed, in conditions given. They had no will, nor rights for personal decision. Their hopes and aspirations were also given. These were marked by the slogans: “Socialism is Good” and “Tomorrow will be Better” (社會主義好, 明天會更好). It was not before too long (probably beginning in the late fifties) that most people realized that those were not only empty slogans, but they were counter to reality, as reality worsened in the flow of time and life. However, the more impinging reality was the fact that one could only stay in the better class group by shouting and believing in such slogans. Thus, life drifted, in accordance with Mao and his Gang of Four at the top, and the Red Guards throughout the country.
By the late seventies, people who had the brain and the courage were ready for a change; and change they participated in diverse ways and wills.
Today, in 2012, those who are fifty years and older, had experienced what life was like during the Mao Era, in one way or another. They feel quite enervated and cynical about that experience in their lives. They regard the present and the future with mixed feelings and outlooks, tinted by fear.
For those in their thirties and forties, however, whatever the Mao Era was had existed in words and the memories of grandparents; not in real experience, only in history. They treat the present as what it is, and the future as possibilities. Whatever the future may be, it will be shaped by them, personally, and as a generation. In other words, they hold the future in their own hands.
I have an occasion lecturing to a group of elites in the latter group, students doing their masters and doctorate degrees in FudanUniversity. The lecture was for three hours. It had extended to four and a half hours by request. The topic was loose-ended: The Possible Impact of Psychology on China. The 31 students were studying in various fields, including public administration, business administration, law and jurisprudence, foreign policies, economics, and entrepreneurship.
I call them the elites, because they are regular students admitted by merit. Their education is free. The university has many other graduate degree programs offered in cooperation with universities from foreign countries. These cater to students who are experienced in their own fields of endeavors, who are able to pay a heavy tuition fee, from 20 to 40 thousand RMB. They went through a different competition for entry.
I was interested to find that, among my group of students, only five are Shanghai residents. The rest had come from diverse parts of China. About half of them had executive positions in government. Eighteen of them were CEO’s of private enterprises. Six were owners of multi-billion dollar companies. They were dedicated and keen learners.
I gave them an overview of the development of psychology and its many applications in collective and private situations; its limitations and successes. I also outlined the historic events which had prompted China to declare psychology as a “white flag” to be negated, and the loss suffered. I then pointed out the need for psychological knowledge and education, as China goes forward to shake hands with the world; and the difficulty in promoting and dissemination knowledge and know-how in psychology, confronted with such a historic deficit. The students had some sense of what was said. But they were shocked with the huge knowledge gap that China has in psychological thinking, as well as what is suffered when perceptions of world events were made without the help of such an all-embracing field of knowledge.
A barrage of questions and self-expressions followed to charge the meeting into high gear. They reflect the concerns and perceptions of this generation of students as they approach life in its private and public constellations.
“Must China meet the world according to the terms of the USA and the West, including Japan?”
“As things stand, we are selling our resources and labor-intensive products to the West, and import knowledge-based technological products from them. When and how can we break this damaging cycle or imbalance?”
“I am aware of, perhaps much more than you do, the many personal, social and political problems confronting China today. Frankly, I can be quite lost and desperate about how to face them, let alone what to do to make possible changes. Please tell us how you see these, and what suggestion you have to help us make a breakthrough.”
“Should an individual put the interest of his country before his own as he strives to improve life for a better future? Should he do just the opposite? Or, Can his choice and efforts be of any real significance? We are still promoting Lei Feng雷鋒 in party meetings and some schools today. But I believe he is a mythical figure whose selfless value and behavior were used to fool people instead of inspiring them. I doubt if a totally selfless person could exist, when he holds value and respect only on others, leaving nothing for himself.”
“My thesis is about the ethical values and moral references of lawyers having more than ten years of practice, in eight provinces, selected at random. I approach this problem seriously enough to travel all over China to personally interview my subjects. I hope to be able to find some concrete answers to see how much they are based on traditional cultural wisdom, or communist ideology, or a mixture of both. I wonder if you have any conjecture about this.”
“I am twenty-eight years old, the only daughter of my parents who own two viable factories producing export goods. My parents expect me to help expand the family business and wealth based on informed management and business development. That is why I am here. I am also enjoying my studies. However, I often question why should I, or my parents, be looking for more expansion. We have enough to do and more than enough wealth to enjoy life, and may be to benefit society. I am not saying I am not satisfied with life, But I do not have an inspiring purpose. I would like to hear your suggestions.”
“I am a party member for over 30 years, including membership with the Junior League. I have enjoyed the privileges of being a communist. My present job teaching at the Dong Hsiao 黨校attests to it. I know all the slogans and songs by heart, having sung them all these years. But, honestly, I do not know for sure what is communism and how it is good for China and our people. It has always been a tool. We realize now it has been a bad tool, because it had helped a minority few to exploit the masses. How I did not realize it earlier I do not know. But since coming here to study at Fu Dan, I had become aware of so many things, seen from many perspectives. Belief in a single truth makes sense no more. As we move forward in an increasingly conflicting and hostile world, China may have to drop this singular belief. Is there a replacement? Where would we find a right replacement, and how?
“China is too large and diversified to govern. We had seen it divided in history. But old wisdom had always treasured the ‘sky and earth in one unity’ (一統天下) concept. Both Canada and the USA are very large countries. How could they be governed so well? Why can’t we learn from them?”
I tried to answer each of these and other questions as well as I could. But it was more interesting to see and hear the intense response and debate the group made as we went through each topic. Their comments were widely grounded and substantiated by experience. They were mature views.
The students were all very interested about the United States. They know little about it beyond that it is rich, powerful, free, and technologically advanced. For example, they are not aware of the American motto “In God we trust” and the implication it has on the social institutions and the daily live and behaviour of the citizens. Nor do they know that the US is not one country but, in many respects, a union of 50 states, each holding a lot of independent rights and responsibilities, including having state troopers within the territories.
It was also news to the group that most of the famous universities are private, subjecting to no control or influence by government. For example, MIT and its Sloan School of Management, which is linked with the School of Management, Fudan, where we were having our discussion, is a private institution.
To many of the students it is inconceivable that an individual could spend all his wealth to establish a university that would thrive in time. They were intrigued that a person like Jefferson, who did so many great things for his country, when asked in old age what was his greatest satisfaction in life, he said it was being the founder and president of the University of Virginia. For him, being a President of the United States was of a lesser contribution to his country than serving a university.
Coming home closer, the group was absolutely amazed that Taiwan has 160 private universities, against about 20 public ones. With approximately the same population, Taiwan has almost six times the number of higher education institutions as Shanghai. This shows how education investment improves not only the quality of citizens, but also the economy and life conditions.
The students and I did not arrive at any conclusive view on the many questions raised. We knew there were no simple definitive answers to complex social and developmental issues. To me, this recognition is already a significant progress in among a generation of students previously trained to believe in slogans.
One of the students drove me back to my hotel after the lecture. The ride was about 20 minutes in heavy traffic, so we had time for a private conversation. He told me that he is a Party member, an identity that he wishes to drop but cannot do so; “It is like a birthmark on you which you do not like to have but it stays with you forever”, he said.
On a positive note, he told me that there is now a shift in education policy, noted in a statement “let educators take responsibility for school decisions”.
“Dose this mean that there will be a diversity in the curriculum and the examination system to be designed and processed by local communities?” I asked in excitement.
“Not so fast, Professor” he replied with a dry laugh. “It means basically two things: 1, to encourage teachers and principals to upgrade their professional knowledge through training. And 2, to allow the establishment of private schools in small numbers, case by case. For example, there are private kindergartens with a very heavy school fee, and, on the other end, postgraduate programs at key universities charging as much as 400000 RMB per student.
We agreed that, even without clear policy change, these two practices are steps forward in education. In time, parents and students will demand for more choice and freedom in learning and development in all schools.