Is Chinese culture a form of social control and brainwashing?
Chinese people have been coming to Australia since the Gold Rush era. However, in the last 30-40 years, very few Chinese people have planted their roots in Australia. Many Chinese people believe that this is the result of the White Australia Policy implemented in Australia since 1901, but I think this is a shallow and misleading view. Most of the commentators do not have an in-depth understanding of Chinese culture and Australian history, and they do not understand that since the Gold Rush Era, there has been a cultural gap between the Chinese miners and the Australian society, and that they could not integrate with each other, which led to the formation of the White Australia Policy.
In order to understand Chinese culture, we have to start from the
history of Chinese people. Chinese history has been written since the Shang Dynasty. When I was in secondary school in Hong Kong, Chinese history was a compulsory subject in junior high school, and Chinese literature was included in senior high school, although I took up a subject later on, my interest in this history and literature has not waned. The interesting thing is that I never thought about why students have to study these subjects. Later, I realized that in Hong Kong, which was a British colony, the teaching of Chinese History and Literature in schools was in fact meant to pass on the Chinese culture in the community.
At that time, the subject of Chinese History was only taught up to the founding of the Republic of China (ROC) by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the father of the nation, because after the founding of the ROC, the two regimes, the ROC and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), had very different interpretations of history. The British chose to seek common ground and put aside their differences, so schools chose not to teach it. What puzzles me most about studying Chinese history is that in the Spring and Autumn period, 2800 years ago, when China was still a feudal society with no centralized authority, there was a market for different theories on how to govern the country, and this was the golden age of Chinese philosophical thought and the freest society. The hundred schools of thought were able to put forward their views on things and learn from and compare each other.
However, Emperor Qin Shihuang used the Legalists to unify and establish the first Chinese empire with a strong army, and by burning books and burying scholars, all books were burned and scholars who had transmitted different ideas were eliminated. With the unification of the written language, the state was governed by harsh laws and controlled the thoughts, words and deeds of the people. In less than 13 years, the Qin Dynasty fell and the Han Dynasty was gradually established. In this short period of time, different ideas had re-emerged in the society. However, within a few decades, Emperor Wu of Han Dynasty abolished the Hundred Schools of Thought, adopted the advice of Dong Zhongshu, and honored Confucianism, establishing through education and authoritarian rule the only patriarchal system of governance accepted by the society for nearly 2,200 years. Until the Republic of China, every opposing thought of the Chinese people in this part of the country was destroyed under totalitarianism. It can be said that both the Chinese who came to Australia during the Gold Rush era and those who immigrated from China to Australia today are accustomed to being the ideological slaves of the rulers, and all they can beg for is a chance to live as the rulers allow them to live.
Western culture is human-centered
Comparing to the history of the West, since the Greek city-states put forward the ideas of democracy, rule of law and freedom 2500 years ago, even if the Christian Church combined with the kingship in the Middle Ages, the totalitarian rule could not take root in Europe. Since the establishment of the Magna Carta in 1215, the British kingship was restricted by the aristocracy. Afterwards, the Enlightenment and knowledge became an important force for social development, and democracy became an alternative to totalitarian rule, with the constitutional monarchy in Britain or the republican system in France as the two major developments. No matter which system is adopted, it is essentially a system in which power is granted by the people to the rulers, and the rulers have to gain the recognition and support of the people in order to maintain legitimate governance, which has gradually become the basis of governance in the western democracies today.
In contrast, most of us Chinese from different parts of the world have seldom experienced the baptism of democracy. When we come to Australia, it is difficult for us to understand and recognize the concepts of democracy, human rights, rule of law and freedom.
Worse still, we have little regard for the social patterns of life that Western societies regard as universal values, and this impacts on our commitment to the society in which we are rooted.
Hong Kong’s 23 pieces of legislation reflect a totalitarian culture
In the last issue of this magazine, we suggested that Hong Kong should pass the National Security Ordinance quickly, but in less than a week, the Ordinance has already passed the third reading in the Legislative Council, fully reflecting the fact that the totalitarian regime that has used harsh laws to govern and control people’s thoughts, words and deeds for more than 2,000 years, as mentioned in the previous section, is still the case today. This contrasts sharply with the Australian Senate’s decision today to suspend and study the government’s interim bill against illegal immigrants on the grounds that it may conflict with the Bill of Rights. What appears to be a draft legislation scrutinized by the Legislative Council is in fact no different from the emperor making it a law once he has given his royal seal of approval. What is even more interesting is that such a bill enacted in Hong Kong claims to have extraterritorial jurisdiction over any country in the world, binding Hong Kong people born in Hong Kong, regardless of the fact that they have become citizens of other countries today.
Why? Because if you are a Hong Kong-born person of Chinese descent, if you do not have a passport from another country, you are defined as a permanent resident of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong residents are regarded as Chinese citizens, and the National Security Ordinance states that it has extraterritorial jurisdiction over them. Only those who have emigrated and applied to the Hong Kong government to give up their permanent right of abode in Hong Kong lose their Chinese citizenship and are no longer subject to this Ordinance. Examining this Ordinance has also made me rethink the question of the status of Hong Kong immigrants who have taken root in Australia.
Immigrants who take root in Australia should not necessarily be cut off from their place of origin. On the contrary, Chinese immigrants can become the middleman between Australia and their place of origin in establishing closer academic and cultural exchanges, business and trade cooperation, or in establishing cooperation between the two places in terms of human resources and resources. In order to play this role well, Chinese immigrants need to integrate into Australia, build up various relationship networks here, and become part of the mainstream society, as well as spreading Chinese culture to them. The Chinese immigrants who are able to do so, I believe, are the ones who will receive the greatest blessings in the process of immigration. This is because they have combined the strengths of two different regions and played their unique roles. Their second generation, who grew up in Australia but in Chinese families, have an advantage over those born in mainstream Australian families, and are more likely to benefit from this special status.
Hong Kong immigrants with this status also play an important role in promoting China’s internationalization and maintaining Hong Kong as a cosmopolitan city. Because of their familiarity with Hong Kong society, and the fact that many of them are still connected to the elite of Hong Kong society, they are vital in promoting cooperation between the two places.
However, the legislation just passed in Hong Kong has made these Hong Kong-Australians wary. For one thing, they can only support but not criticize Hong Kong, or else they will have to run the risk of violating the Ordinance one day when they return to Hong Kong because of what they have said or done in Australia, and the consequences will be unimaginable. Under these risks, these Hong Kong people will either have to give up their permanent resident status in Hong Kong, or they will have to refrain from contacting their friends in Hong Kong and returning to Hong Kong. Either way, it is not a good thing for Hong Kong or China.
Chinese will only recognize Australian values more
Over the past two decades, the Chinese government has emphasized its united front with overseas Chinese, seeking their recognition and support for China, which has led to the creation of many overseas Chinese communities, as well as fostering exchanges and co-operation with China in different parts of the world. Since 2017, China has changed its united front policy to require Chinese people around the world to fight for China’s rights in the countries they live in, which has led to the enactment of the Anti-Foreign Intervention Act (AFIA) in Australia, which protects nationals from being infiltrated. Mr. Sunny Duong, a Vietnamese Chinese leader who has just been charged with violating the Anti-Foreign Intervention Law in Australia and convicted and sentenced to two years and nine months in prison, has become a victim of the tense relationship between China and Australia.
As a matter of fact, few Chinese people living in Australia initially thought about the advantages and disadvantages of the systems and cultures of China and Australia. Most of them only look at which place offers them the greatest monetary return, such as where the best investments are made, or where the most money is made in trade and business. That’s why when China’s economy grew at a phenomenal rate after its accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) over the past 20 years, most Chinese immigrants to Australia were engaged in Sino-Australian trade or went back to China to develop their businesses, and were less inclined to devote themselves to life in Australia. Hong Kong people, who are more engaged in professional work in Australia, chose to integrate into the Australian mainstream, only to realize that they are a tiny minority.
However, with China’s economy under pressure and Hong Kong no longer having much room for development, it is believed that those Chinese who remain in Australia will be more proactive in seeking room for development, and as a result, they will be more proactive in integrating into the Australian mainstream society. As a result, the Australian society and culture will be more attractive to them.