Ma Rong: Reflections on Contemporary Chinese Ethnic Policy (1/3)

"Consensus Online" guest: Ma Rong, professor and doctoral supervisor of the Department of Sociology and Institute of Sociological Anthropology of Peking University

Moderator: Huang Nan

[Moderator] : In this issue of " Consensus Online ", we are honored to invite Prof. Ma Rong from the Department of Sociology of Peking University to discuss ethnic issues in China with us. First of all, could you please talk about what is " nation " ? What is the difference and connection between the terms " nation " and " ethnic group "** ?

**[ Ma Rong ]: **We have been using the concept of "nation" for a long time since the founding of the People's Republic of China, and it has become very common and has become a relatively fixed usage. We sometimes talk about "the Chinese nation" and sometimes "56 ethnic groups", and these usages have become established. However, not many people actually think about it seriously. When did this term, which is composed of the two Chinese characters "nationality", enter our life and discourse system. The explanation given in the "Encyclopedia of China" (Volume on Ethnicities) is that Chinese dynasties and dynasties had titles such as "min", "zu", "bu", etc., but the word "nationality" was formed into a fixed vocabulary, which has the same meaning as what we have today. The usage of the clear political meaning of the understanding is only a recent thing. The "Encyclopedia" believes that in 1903 Liang Qichao introduced the nationalist views of German scholars, and proposed that "nationalism" should be used to unite the Chinese people and fight against imperialist aggression. In the last years of the Qing Dynasty, especially after the 1880 Reform and the Sino-Japanese War, China's national power declined and was in a state of crisis. At that time, people were thinking about how to save the country and survive. China is so big, and there are different groups such as Manchu, Han, Mongolian, Huizang, etc. Manchu court officials rejected the Han nationality. Faced with such a crisis situation, what should the Chinese do? That generation of thinkers and scholars must consider, where is the cohesion within China? A country's political framework with a sense of reformation. In the past, everyone was a subject of the Qing Dynasty. So what should we do in the new situation? What should the Chinese do at the end of the Qing Dynasty?

In the late 19th century, the political organization of the Germans after the French Revolution was a small principality, fragmented and unable to withstand Napoleon's military attack. After Napoleon's victory, he forced them to continue to maintain their separate states. The character wants to unify the various principalities belonging to the Germanic blood. In order to build a unified identity foundation, he proposes German nationalism, hoping to build a unified Germanic nation-state on the basis of such identity. Liang Qichao believed that such a concept of nationalism and related political identity could also unite all the subordinate groups of the Qing Dynasty at that time. For this reason, he wrote several articles devoted to Chinese nationalism. It was during this period that modern concepts such as "nation" and "nationalism" originated in Europe began to enter China.

[Host] : When did the Chinese start to use the concept of " nation " ?

**[ Ma Rong ]: **According to the investigation of some scholars, the earliest appearance of the word "nationality" in modern Chinese characters was around 1837. Biography (Eastern Western Monthly Magazine) mentioned "the nation of Israel", which is the earliest and modern Chinese character for the word "nation". At that time the word "nation" was used to describe the peoples of Europe. So, when did the various groups in China begin to be called "Mongolian people", "Manchu people", and "Han people"? When did these specific names appear? It was also in China at the end of the Qing Dynasty. Turbulent times colliding with the West. At that time, the Xingzhong Association and later the Tongmenghui organized by Sun Yat-sen put forward a political slogan called "Expel the Tartars and restore China", which obviously divided the Han and the Manchus into two different ethnic groups, which was equivalent to encouraging Han nationalism to oppose the Manchus. . This slogan was started by the Revival China Association and the Tongmenghui, but one thing is not always clear to everyone. This is the slogan of the Han nationalism "to expel the Tartars and restore China". In fact, it is a subordinate of the Japanese right-wing organization Heilonghui. An organization called Xuanyang Society suggested to Sun Yat-sen, which later became the oath of the Revival China Association.

[Host ]: Was the slogan "Expel the Tartars and restore China" raised in the Ming Dynasty?

**[ Ma Rong ]:** At the end of the Yuan Dynasty, Zhu Yuanzhang raised an army to overthrow the Yuan Dynasty established by the Mongols. In the past in Chinese history, there were "Five Hus and Chaos", and the Central Plains people used to refer to the northern nomadic tribes as "Hu". Some Japanese scholars are very familiar with Chinese history and literature, so when provoking relations between Manchu and Han, they suggested that the Han people "drive out the Tartars".

[Host ]: You said just now that Sun Yat-sen was bewitched by the Japanese right wing and preached a slogan of Han nationalism in China. What position did other countries take on the China issue at that time?

**[ Ma Rong ]:** In the late Qing Dynasty, since the Opium War, the imperialist powers launched many wars of aggression against China, such as the Second Opium War, when the British and French troops entered Beijing. At that time, the imperialist countries very much wanted to divide up China, but later found that under the banner of the Qing Dynasty, all ethnic groups in China, including all frontier tribes, were still very united. During the Opium War, the imperial court dispatched soldiers from ethnic minorities from Guangxi to fight in Guangdong. When the British and French allied forces entered Beijing in 1860, the most fierce resistance was the cavalry of the Horqin Mongolian prince Seng Gelinqin. During the Sino-Japanese War, they were on the Korean Peninsula. The main force fighting against the Japanese army was the Huihui army from Shaanxi and Gansu. The imperialist countries found that China, which had a population of 400 million at that time, was difficult to conquer directly by force, and the expeditionary forces from Europe could only send 10,000 or 20,000 people at most. These expedition forces may be able to occupy several cities, but they want to use China's overall force. Conquest and partition are impossible. The method adopted by the British when conquering India was to try to divide the more than 120 independent states on the Indian subcontinent at that time, contact one state to attack another state, and finally gradually annex the scattered and ununited Indian subcontinent completely. . At that time, the imperialist countries discovered that the best way to achieve the goal of dividing China was to split China. ", instilling the concept and political thinking of "nationalism" into the elites of various groups. Referring to the European idea of "one nation, one country", these groups with various differences should establish different countries, so the Manchus should be one nation, the Han are one nation, and the Mongolians are one nation. During this period, diplomats, missionaries, anthropologists and explorers of imperialist countries began to use these terms, referring to these groups in China as "nations". These appellations and vocabulary were gradually translated into Chinese "ethnic", and this translation process may be translated into Chinese through Japanese characters. Influenced by the words used in these foreign documents, the Chinese began to use words such as "Mongolian nation", "Manchu nation", "Huanghan nation" and so on.

[Moderator] : What groups did the concept of " ethnicity " used by the Chinese at that time include?

**[ Ma Rong ]: The slogan proposed by the **Xingzhonghui "Expel the Tartars and restore China", the "China" in the "China" only includes the Han people, so this is a political slogan of a narrow Han nationalism induced by imperialism . You may have seen a movie "Let the Bullets Fly". The flag displayed in the movie is the Eighteen Star Flag. At that time, there was a slogan called "Eighteen Provinces Build China". Where did the slogan "Eighteen provinces build China" come from? You may not necessarily know. This slogan was not put forward before and after the 1911 Revolution. The first time this slogan was put forward was in 1895. At that time, there was a Japanese ronin who lived in China for a long time and worked as a spy for the Japanese Navy. . In the Sino-Japanese War of 1895, the Beiyang Navy retreated to Liugong Island in Weihai after its defeat at sea, and relied on land forts to resist the Japanese Navy. In the end, Japan sent an army to land, occupied the mountain behind Liugong Island, and bombarded our fleet with the artillery of our own fort. Therefore, in order not to let the Japanese army snatch the remaining warships, these warships sank themselves, and the entire Beiyang Navy was annihilated. At that time, Zongfang Xiaotaro drafted a Chinese-language security notice for the landed Japanese Army, "Sincerity and Advice to Heroes of the Eighteen Provinces", saying, "One of the barbarians outside the original fortress of the Manchu Qing Dynasty is neither the virtue of being ordered, nor does it contribute to China, taking advantage of Zhu Mingzhi's Bad luck, violent robbery, and falsehood for a while", calling on the Han people to "advocate the Central Plains, unite the strong and the revolutionary army, and drive the Manchu Qing clan outside the country.... The time must not be lost, and the opportunity will never come.... Don't be laughed at by Mingzu!" It means that the Manchu barbarians are taking advantage of the decline of the Ming Dynasty to occupy your country. You should organize a revolutionary army to drive away the Manchus and rebuild the Chinese country. Japan will help you. Therefore, the idea of "building China in eighteen provinces" was first proposed by the Japanese during the Sino-Japanese War in 1895. The radical Han revolutionaries accepted this idea, and also accepted the narrow and full of "expel the Tartars and restore China". Political slogans.

After the Revolution of 1911, the most radical revolutionaries displayed the Eighteen-Star Banner with "Eighteen Provinces and China" as the platform for the founding of the country. At that time, the Qing Dynasty had a total of 22 provinces in addition to the special administrative regions of Inner Mongolia, Qinghai, and Tibet. "Eighteen provinces to build China" means that there are 4 provinces in the Han country that are not needed, and the three eastern provinces are not needed. That is the hometown of the Manchus. Xinjiang was established as a province in 1884, and there are few Han people, so it is not needed. We can see that this is a very narrow Han nationalism. Imperialism was the initiator of the division of China into many "nations" and the Han-Manchu clan. The design of all these plans, including calling various groups within China such as Mongolians, Manchus, Han, and Tibetans as "nations" and using nation-state slogans to encourage them to split up and become independent are all those who attempt to divide and divide China. Imperialist conspiracy. This is my basic point, because we Chinese people do not have this title in the traditional concept.

Influenced by the discourse of imperialism, the Chinese began to refer to various groups within the country as "nations". Later, Liang Qichao found that there is a problem with such a name, which will lead to the division of the country, so he wrote an article saying that we should divide nationalism into two categories, one is called big nationalism and the other is called small nationalism. Because "nationality" has already been called, some Mongolians, Tibetans, and Han people have begun to call themselves "nationalities". It is difficult to change these names at this time. Therefore, Liang Qichao proposed that we can divide "nationalism" in China into two levels. One is nationalism in which all Chinese people unite against foreign powers to fight foreign powers, which is called "big nationalism", and the other is "nationalism" in which various groups in China safeguard their own interests, called "minor nationalism". Liang Qichao believed that nationalism was an important cohesive force for the survival of the Chinese nation. It is very popular, so he proposes a distinction between the two levels of "big nationalism" and "small nationalism" to avoid the division of the country.

Today, we look back at the battle between the royalists and the revolutionary parties in the last years of the Qing Dynasty. In fact, the royalists who advocated the constitutional monarchy, such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao, had their reasons. The truth is actually very simple. In a country as big as China, there are many groups inside. The authority that Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and Tibet really submit to is the Manchu emperor. Unity is beneficial. For example, in the United Kingdom, within the territory under the jurisdiction of the British Empire, in fact Scotland, Wales, and Ireland are subordinated to the British royal family. If the English overthrew the royal family and established a pure constitutional democracy, all regions opposed the history of the English people. Tradition will become a real contradiction, and the country may be divided. Therefore, in order to prevent the division of the country, the traditional authority symbol of a British royal family was finally retained in the constitutional movement, a constitutional monarchy was established, the historical and traditional symbols of surrender and submission in various regions were retained, and the relationship between Scotland, Wales, Ireland and the central government was continued. cohesion between. At that time, Kang Youwei pointed out that if the practice of "expelling the Tartars" was really followed by the narrow-minded Han people, there would definitely be a split and civil war in China. From this point of view, he put forward the political proposition of constitutional monarchy at that time and advocated the preservation of the Manchu royal family, which had his foresight and reason for maintaining the unity of the country. Therefore, I am not in favor of simply denying the views of the constitutional monarchists.

[Moderator] : We read history and know that the flag of the Beiyang government is the five-color flag. When was the slogan of " Republic of Five Nationalities " proposed?

**[ Ma Rong ]: **At the end of the Qing Dynasty, the use of the word "nation" was very confusing. The Chinese nation was a "nation", the Mongols were also a "nation", and the Manchus were also a "nation". At this time, the name was used. Rather messy. When the Revolution of 1911 occurred, Sun Yat-sen was in California, USA, and came back at the end of 1911 to attend a meeting held in Nanjing to discuss how to establish a new republic in the future. After the Revolution of 1911, the governors of the southern provinces declared their independence from the Qing Dynasty. At this time, many provincial military and political leaders who supported the republic held a meeting in Nanjing and unanimously rejected the plan of "building China in eighteen provinces", thinking that if this was the case, the whole country would be in chaos. The final consensus was called "five ethnic republics", which advocated that all groups under the jurisdiction of the Qing Dynasty should unite to establish a republic system. Therefore, the eighteen-star flag was cancelled and replaced with a five-color flag, representing the "Republic of Five Races". Sun Yat-sen also listened to the different opinions of the participants under the situation at that time and accepted the "Republic of Five Races". What if we insisted on "expelling the Tartars" and ethnic cleansing in every province? We should drive out and kill all the Manchu banners scattered in every province of the country? At that time, some revolutionary party members, such as Zhang Taiyan, put forward a very radical slogan. For example, Zou Rong's "Revolutionary Army" published in 1903 put forward very radical slogans, "to exterminate the five million Manchu species with unusual hair and horns", "to expel the Manchus living in China, or kill them for revenge". To kill or drive out the Manchus in the provinces where the Han people live is very inappropriate today. In 1912, when Sun Yat-sen took office as the interim president in Nanjing, he proposed that "the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, and Tibetan lands are combined into one country, and the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, and Tibetan ethnic groups are combined into one person, which is called the unity of the nation." The concept should be the Chinese nation, which is the unified Chinese nation of the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui and Tibetan tribes. The idea of "removing the Tartars and restoring China" has changed to establishing a unified nation-state with the Chinese nation as a unit. A very significant shift in philosophy. Later, in the first lecture of "Three Principles of the People", he said: Chinese nationalism is nationalism.

When we look at the terms used in society throughout the period of the Republic of China, both "nations" and "nations" were used, and they were not unified. However, we found that after liberation in 1949, the term "nation" was no longer used, and only the term "nation" was used, which was the unification of new China in terms of concept and discourse.

Now to sum up the ethnic policy during the Republic of China, I think it can be divided into two periods. The Eighteen-Star Flag was first used in the Revolution of 1911, but it was quickly changed to "Republic of Five Nationalities". From 1911 to 1928, the slogan of the Beiyang government was "Republic of Five Nationalities." ", playing the five-color flag, this is the first period. In 1928, the Northern Expedition was successful, and the Kuomintang established the Nanjing government. After 1928, the national flag of the Kuomintang government was a red flag in the blue sky and white sun. During this period, the "five ethnic republics" were no longer mentioned, and the "Chinese nation clan theory" or "Chinese nation clan theory" was put forward, arguing that the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui, Tibetan and other groups were all "Zongzhi" or "Zhongzhi" within the Chinese nation. "Clan". 1939 was the most critical time of the Anti-Japanese War. Japan occupied Changsha and bombed Chongqing. Wang Jingwei established a puppet regime in Nanjing. At this time, the Japanese occupied half of China, and the situation was critical. At this time, Mr. Gu Jiegang published an article in Kunming, Yunnan, with a very clear title, "The Chinese Nation is One". He said that in the past, he also believed that all people with different languages and ancestors can be called a "nation", but if we take China's internal If many groups with language differences and different historical memories are called "nations", under the agitation and differentiation of imperialism, China will inevitably split.

Mr. Gu mentioned his own changes in the concept of "nation", mainly because he found that after the "September 18 Incident", Japan used the "Manchu nation" to establish a pseudo-Manchukuo state, and also used the "ethnicity" of some upper-class people in Inner Mongolia. "Islamicism", supported Chahar's De King to establish the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Government, and the Japanese military spent a lot of effort to mobilize the Huihui warlords in the northwest, promote the independence movement in the Muslim areas, and sent people to contact Ma Qi, Ma Lin, Ma Bufang, etc. People, try to divide China. Mr. Gu Jiegang said that our northeast has become "Manchukuo", the army of King De of Inner Mongolia has also joined forces with the Japanese to attack the Nationalist government army, and the Muslims in the northwest are also encouraged by the Japanese. If we continue to call various groups in the country "ethnic groups" "In accordance with the nationalist principle of "one nation, one country", how can China not be divided! Therefore, he said that we must insist that the concept of "nation" can only be the Chinese nation, and other groups must not be called for "nation".

Chiang Kai-shek said in Xining in 1941 when he was talking with some local officials and religious elites, we said that there are five clans in China, but not five "nationalities", because all of us are part of the Chinese nation, he said. It is not advisable to call the Han, Manchu, Mongolian, and Tibetan capitals "the nation". Therefore, the slogan of the Chiang Kai-shek government in the Republic of China since 1928 has been "the theory of the Chinese nation's clan." This was also the view when Chiang Kai-shek published the book "The Destiny of China" in 1943.

[Moderator ] : The Chinese Communist Party in Yan'an criticized Jiang's "The Destiny of China" because this book proposed " one nation, one country, one leader ", and believed that he advocated the use of the Kuomintang to unify China and eliminate dissident political forces .

**[ Ma Rong ]: **Of course, the Chinese Communist Party criticizes the political propositions in "The Destiny of China". He also criticized Chiang Kai-shek on the ethnic issue, thinking that Chiang Kai-shek did not even recognize these ethnic minorities, so how could he recognize ethnic equality?

The Communist Party of China was established in 1921, and the founding of the Communist Party of China was established under the guidance and support of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Therefore, when the Communist Party of China published its first political program in 1922, it completely copied the Soviet Union in terms of content and formulation. Law, proposing that China's Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui and Tibetan are all "nations" and have the right to self-determination to establish an independent state, and then form a federal state with the Han proletarian state. This is the Soviet political program and model of state building. In 1913, Stalin published "Marxism and the National Question", proposing his definition of "nation" and the corresponding national theory, claiming that the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Georgia, Ukraine and other groups under Russia are all "nations", all of which have self-determination and independence. The power to establish a state, the Soviet Union after the October Revolution practiced according to this national theory, calling all the different groups within Tsarist Russia "nations", giving them the right to self-determination and forming many "republics", and then The Soviet Union was established under a federal system. After the Communist Party of China was founded, it also understood and thought about China's ethnic issues according to the thinking of the Soviet Union at that time. At that time, the Communist Party of China was very young. It was an organization with only 50 party members jointly established by several Marxist groups. It accepted the leadership of the Comintern and the Soviet Union, and did not know much about many issues such as the international political situation and nationalist movements in various countries. Therefore, the young Communist Party of China at that time accepted the Soviet Union's nationalist theory, national policy, and some concepts and formulations. , can be said to be historical inevitability.

Later, after the end of the Anti-Japanese War in 1945, considering that the Soviet Union under Stalin's leadership showed territorial ambitions in Northeast China, Xinjiang, and Outer Mongolia, and considering the strength of the Soviet Union, the leaders of the Communist Party of China at that time changed the system design. The idea is to no longer mention federalism, but instead advocate the system of regional ethnic autonomy. However, although we have not implemented a federal system in the national system, after the founding of the People's Republic of China, China has actively learned from the Soviet Union's system and experience in many aspects. Mao Zedong once said that "a good teacher and a good friend are the Soviet Union." At that time, no matter in politics, diplomacy, and military, New China needed the support of the Soviet Union. The leadership of the Communist Party of China came from Yan'an to Xibaipo and then to Beijing. The Communist Party of China has no management experience in governing a country with 600 million people, so the new China has many aspects such as higher education, railways, banks, customs, military, postal services, and finance. In other respects, it is to learn the system of the Soviet Union, and it also includes the theory, system and policy in dealing with ethnic relations. Therefore, in the 1950s, we also learned from the Soviet Union and carried out "ethnic identification", and systematically established a system of regional ethnic autonomy throughout the country.

Going back to the concept of "nation", we now use the word "nation" at two levels, one is called the "Chinese nation" and the other is called the 56 "nations". However, if you use the same Chinese character on two levels of completely different nature and meaning, it will inevitably cause some confusion. On issues such as Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea, Diaoyu Island, and Huangyan Island, we will think of the Chinese nation's foreign nationalism, but in the daily life of ordinary people, cadres, and intellectuals, people generally consider their own specific "ethnic composition." For example, a concept we often talk about is "minority", which refers to the 55 ethnic groups excluding the Han nationality, which has become the general term for another collective. It doesn't care about the Han nationality. When we talk about "ethnic policy", it is definitely a policy aimed at ethnic minorities and has nothing to do with Han people. When we talk about "ethnic cadres" and "ethnic students", they do not include Han people. In this case, what we emphasize in terms of daily life, policy discourse, politics, and administrative establishment is the "nationality" at the level of the 56 ethnic groups, not the Chinese nation, and we have many aspects that target ethnic minorities preferential policies, such as family planning, placement of cadres, bonus points for the college entrance examination, etc., including the judicial "two less and one leniency" policy introduced in 1984. In this way, from cadres to ordinary people and young students, when they think about their political status, judicial rights, development space and various preferential policies, his core focus is still on their specific "ethnic composition". "Nation" is the specific ethnic group to which he belongs (Han, Uyghur, Tibetan, etc.), and the concept of "Chinese nation" seems to him to be a relatively distant thing that has little to do with his daily life.

[Host] : How do other countries use the concept of " nation "? What level of group do they refer to as a " nation " ? What kind of group does the concept " ethnic group " refer to?

**[ Ma Rong ]: **There are many different groups in many countries in the world, such as blacks, Indians and yellows in the United States, and Bangladeshis, Tamils, Sikhs, etc. in India. There are different languages, different religious beliefs, different traditional social organizations, and different ancestral bloodlines, but these countries did not call these different groups "ethnic groups" but "ethnic groups" in the overall design of the "nation-state" construction. Black Americans make up 13% of the nation's total population and are also an ethnic group. What is the difference between "ethnic group" and "nation" in the way of thinking of building a country? According to my own understanding, nation is linked to the nationalist movement and "nation-state" that emerged in modern times. According to Western traditions According to the nationalist theory of "one nation, one country", according to this theory and political principle, each nation has the natural right to establish an independent state and separate politics. Similarly, according to Stalin's theory of nations, and according to Lenin's right to national self-determination, all groups called "nations" have the right to establish an independent state. There is a constitutional basis for the political disintegration of the national republic as a unit. Yeltsin proposed the "Declaration of Sovereignty", and the Russian Federation Parliament passed the "Declaration of Sovereignty", calling for secession from the Soviet Union, which is in line with the rights stipulated in the Soviet constitution.

Therefore, considering the relationship between the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the "right to national self-determination", we feel that it is of particular significance to revisit the great discussion about "the Chinese nation is one" in 1939. Why did Gu Jiegang, when the Anti-Japanese War was very critical, proposed that we must emphasize that the Chinese nation is one, insisting that other groups in China cannot be called "nations", Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Hui-Tibetan, etc. cannot be called "nations", because he was worried that China was divided at that time. risk. The collapse of the Soviet Union was a huge shock to me, and it prompted me to reconsider the question of what groups should be called "nations." This is because whether it is according to the Western national theory or the Marxist-Leninist national theory, a group has the right to self-determination and independence after being recognized as a "nation". There is a potential risk of national division. This is why I emphasize the need to strengthen the identification of all citizens with the "Chinese nation". Our national anthem was born in the country's critical anti-Japanese war. "The Chinese nation is at its most critical time." A sense of identity is still very much needed today. Referring to the construction principles of other nation-states, I suggest renaming our 56 ethnic groups as "ethnic groups", and at the same time continue to be called such and such ethnic groups as Mongolians and Tibetans.

Our official now translates 56 "nationalities" into English "nationality", which is usually understood internationally as nationality. We now translate this level of nationality into "nationality", but there is a problem with the English translation. At present, the application of the concept of 56 ethnic groups in China is prone to conflict and overlap with the level of the Chinese nation. The internationally used "nation" has a very clear and distinct political meaning, including being linked with the right of national self-determination and the right to independent statehood. The historical status and the actual situation in reality, so I propose whether to consider changing the level of 56 ethnic groups to "ethnic groups", the purpose is to reduce the political color of this level, which I call "depoliticization". At the same time, as citizens of a modern civic state, the cultural rights of members of various ethnic groups in language, religion, living customs and other aspects and other rights that citizens should have are guaranteed by the Constitution.

[Moderator] : If the name is changed to **" ethnic group "** , will it cause other follow-up questions?

**[ Ma Rong ]: **There are some ethnic groups in our country whose economic and technological development is relatively lagging due to various reasons in history. For members of these groups, the central government and the mainstream society will continue to provide assistance and support. But logically speaking, the reason for the government to provide support and assistance is not necessarily because of which "nation" you belong to, so the government will help you. As a group, the government will still support you. In addition, even if you do not belong to a certain minority group, just some individual citizens, or some Han individuals need to be taken care of due to disability or some reason, will the government not take care of you? According to the basic concept of a modern citizen-state, every citizen is this Equal citizens of the country, citizens should enjoy citizenship rights, including the right to use and develop their mother tongue, the right to religious belief, the right to survival and development, and the right to equality in the judiciary, all of which are included in the right to citizenship. If we truly implement citizenship rights, all these rights that ethnic minorities are worried about should be guaranteed. Therefore, some people worry that if their group is not called "ethnicity" but is renamed "ethnic group", it seems that some rights will be lost. This is completely unnecessary worry. According to the traditional theory of nationalism, by giving up the name symbol of "nation", these groups may have given up the right to independent statehood. But do these groups really want the right to establish a state independently? So, I think if some ethnic minority elites really only worry about the cultural rights, development rights, and religious freedom rights of their own groups, they are actually called "ethnic groups" or "" nation", there is no essential difference.

[Host ]: You just mentioned the government's preferential treatment of ethnic minorities in economic and social affairs. Will this cause another problem? In those autonomous areas where ethnic minorities live together, the majority of the population are ethnic minorities, and they enjoy preferential treatment in some policies, but some of them are Han people. Will these Han people feel discriminated against?

[Ma Rong ]: My point of view is that when a society undergoes major reforms in the overall system of ethnic relations, it is sometimes necessary to adjust the ethnic gaps caused by history through policy inclinations. The Kuomintang government used to invest very little in the development of ethnic minority areas. Of course, Chinese society has never been very stable during the Republic of China. Therefore, the infrastructure in Tibet, Qinghai, and Xinjiang is very backward, and modern education has not developed. There is a clear development gap between the residents in the coastal areas and the Han areas in the coastal areas. New China was established in 1949, and the country's political system underwent fundamental changes. New China advocated ethnic equality and common prosperity. Therefore, after the founding of the People's Republic of China, the government implemented a series of support policies for ethnic minority areas and local ethnic minorities. In order to truly realize the equality of all ethnic groups in politics, justice, culture and education, and economic development, these systems and policies are absolutely necessary. In a historical period of institutional transformation, when the attitude of the mainstream society and mainstream groups towards ethnic minorities has changed from a pattern of indifference, discrimination, indifference and even oppression in the past to a model of treating each other as equals, caring for each other and hoping for common development When a new model is established, the central government and mainstream society must give certain assistance to ethnic minorities.

[Host ]: A netizen mentioned that the central government has a " stepmother complex " when it treats ethnic minorities. He always feels that he is a " stepmother ". In order to make him accepted by children who are not his own, he should compare himself with them. The biological child is even better. This is the various preferential policies for ethnic minorities. Since you feel that he is different and that he is not your own, you are very kind to him, but these children will feel very bad. What do you think of this view? **

[Ma Rong ]: I think this is the case. Our government should not treat the minority groups as non-natural children, but should treat them as their own children, but for some reason, they did not take good care of them in the past. Now I will treat them as my own children. If I find that they are undernourished, I may have to give them more milk. Giving more milk does not mean that they are not my own, just because they objectively need it. Before the 1960s, the United States implemented a system of racial segregation. It implemented racial segregation in schools, residential areas, and public service facilities. Black people were discriminated against. Black people and white people could not enter a lounge, a hotel, or a toilet. . When the Civil Rights Act was promulgated to implement the affirmative action system, mainstream American society and white people should take some compensation measures for the black group. The then US President Johnson, when defending the preferential policies for blacks, once said that when a person is chained for a long time, you can't open the chain and pull him into the arena and say, you Now you can participate in the competition like others, because this person did not have any opportunities for exercise and activities in the past. When running 100 meters, he cannot perform normally. At this time, you need to give him a little help. At that time, the U.S. Congress passed the "Affirmative Action" Act, which was translated as "affirmative action" by some, and was literally translated as "affirmative action", which were all practices and measures to provide preferential opportunities for the development of black people. In the past, black students could not enter good schools and universities, and were discriminated against in employment. Therefore, the government proposed to arrange a proportion and special care for black students in the recruitment and recruitment process. I think this kind of policy is necessary during the transition period of a policy. .

But we need to pay attention to the issue of group equality. When you give members of one group collective care, that's inequality for members of other groups. In the long run, any preferential policy targeting groups is an unequal policy. However, when a group has been discriminated against for a long time, in order to fundamentally eliminate discrimination and help this group achieve the ability to compete on an equal footing, in a transitional period after the policy change, the historically discriminated group is implemented. Targeted preferential policies are likely to be necessary. As for the length of this transition period, it depends on the specific effect of our policy support. Take the United States as an example, if after a generation or two, many black people have passed the preferential policy of "affirmative action" and entered first-class universities, they can even become members of parliament, mayors, justices, secretary of state, and presidents. Black people have already entered the university. In many government agencies, a black middle class of a certain size has emerged. At this time, some white people will propose that the status of black people has been significantly improved, so why should special policy be given to black people at this time? College admissions Why do black people have special places and can be admitted with reduced points? When the black middle class gradually develops, the white people in the mainstream society will gradually rebound against this preferential policy, thinking that this is "reverse discrimination" and violates the white people's role in the United States. Citizens' right to equal competition. It's only natural that this kind of voice should arise among white people, because group preference policies are indeed unequal policies. The current reality is that states in the United States are gradually weakening or even canceling preferential policies based on the rebound of whites in their states against these preferential policies. I think this is a natural evolution process. When the National Bill of Rights and racial preferences were first voted in in the 1960s, most whites at the time understood and supported it because they had witnessed and felt the discrimination and segregation of blacks, and they sympathized with the long-term Discriminatory treatment of blacks. The Civil Rights Act and "affirmative action" bills would not have been able to pass Congress without the support of a majority of whites. But after one or two generations, the social phenomenon that the younger generation of whites see is that blacks are enjoying preferential policies, and these younger generations may not understand and accept it. So I think the group preferential policy can only be a transitional policy. After one or two generations, there will be a rebound from the younger generation of most ethnic groups.