| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
169122
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Colonial and postcolonial relations have always constituted sites of knowledge production in the Global South. This is particularly noticeable when it comes to the production of knowledge of a Global South self vis-à-vis the West. However, the literature has not seriously attended self-knowledge production in the Global South with regard to non-Western others. The paper compares South and Southeast Asian think tanks to reflect upon a common identity strategy of small nations to become a civilizational bridge between competing major neighbours. Specifically, China experts in these areas host more or less a common wish or even a desire to be a bridge over the difference of China and its potential rival in India, the West, or both. The bridge role is a rare sensibility in the postcolonial critique of the West. Watching China from its Southern Third World neighbourhood incurs such an agenda. Relying on interviews of retired diplomats and think tank experts, the paper also discusses how the abovementioned methodological characteristics affect the enactment of the bridge role.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
157522
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article divides China watching by the two dimensions of position and purpose. By position, the article asks if a narrator looks at China from an external or an internal perspective. By purpose, it asks if the narrative is to critically provide an evaluative perspective, to objectively represent an authentic China, or to practically discuss a life and identity strategy of Chinese people. Specifically, the complex sensibilities towards China among Taiwanese migrant scholars reify the genuine and yet often-unnoticed agency required to proceed with writing on China. With initially both the Chinese Civil War and later pro-independence politics in Taiwan poisoning relationships with China, the politically divided Taiwanese scholars enter a different environment in Hong Kong, which urges neither total confrontation nor complete loyalty in approaching China. How the Hong Kong circumstances have impacted upon the choices of these Taiwanese intellectuals in their presentation of the subject matter of China, in comparison with their other colleagues in Hong Kong, is the primary goal of the following discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
157516
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Hong Kong exemplifies a geo-cultural path that the literature on hybridity has not seriously considered. Hong Kong’s particular geo-cultural path is different from what the literature refers to as hybridity because Hong Kong’s identity encompasses non-synthetic, lingering Confucian, Christian, liberal, patriotic and other identities that exist parallel to each other, rather than merging into a certain hybrid identity. Because of this unique identity, the already hybrid identity of Hong Kong could disintegrate at any time because of re-imagined or re-enacted traditions. In other words, the coexisting parallel identities support a cyclical historiography rather than the celebrated postcoloniality that moves Hong Kong irrevocably away from any alleged past. Hong Kong demonstrates this constant re-appealing that takes place on the basis of solid traditions in Confucianism, Christianity and patriotism, in addition to the familiar liberalism and anti-Communism. Chineseness has become extremely difficult to define and attempts at doing so generate bitter feelings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|