As can be see from the end. this is not a lecture on China, but on the West, and an appeql to hombleness for our arrogant civilisation. Anyway, it suggests a few reflections about my beloved China.
1) American long for a China split into many medium-sized states instead than a huge empire challenging the supremacy of USA. They therefore support the idea that China is not a nation, that chinese is not a unitary language, etc. Anyway, Jaques has some reason to think that China is not a nation in the sens of western nations. Bit this has historical reasons: the national states arose in the Reneissance, but the Reinessance was possible only because the Roman Empire collapsed, and China had not a Reinessance, precisely because the Chinese Empire never collapsed, but slowly evolved into a super-advanced civilisation without ever leaving the Middle Age.
2) Jacques stresses the fundamental point that Chinese see the state as the head of the family. This is a brilliant idea of Confucius: he managed to unite the chinese, simply by stating that China is a single, big family. Western states are not based on familial ties, but on the social contract.
3) Finally, I would like to underscore that the writing system is very different from the alphabet, and this leads to a different way of reasoning: Westerns think is linearly, whereas Chineses think in a ntework - not differently from Jesuits, who in fact had a high esteem of the Chinese people.
Jacques is right in saying that we are ignoran about China. We should ask Chinese to present themselves, abyway, not clever and expert British.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento