The Changing Politics of Ethnic Minority Classification and Experience Within China Julianne Stewart ASIAN 220 5/21/2018 The perception and portrayal of China’s many minority groups has shifted over time. Many people still only think of the predominant Han majority when they think of Chinese people but this erases all of the ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity that exists within the country. The Chinese government has had different policies regarding recognition of minorities that have led to both erasure of identity of minorities within China and the promotion of harmony between China’s 55 ethnic minorities depending on the political climate. These policies and the the language used regarding recognition of minorities has directly affected the lives and opportunities minority groups have today. While Han Chinese people are still the overwhelming majority, making up 92% of the population of China, Chinese minorities still amount to around 110 million people who are concentrated mainly around Southern and Western China. Today, China officially recognizes 56 minority groups within China. The slogan “tongyi de duo minzu guojia” or unified multinational ​ ​ country reflect the Chinese government’s current attempts to present China as a diverse but unified nation (Mullaney 2012). The 56 recognized ethnic groups and China’s multinational status are relatively recent developments. The Qing dynasty (1644-1912) was founded by the Manchu people, not the Han. Although the Manchu themselves were technically minorities, this did prevent the Qing dynasty from referring to minority groups in Yunnan under the single label of “barbarians in the southwest” (Mullaney 2012). This shows that minorities are not all united within China and are prone to enforcing the same stereotypes of other groups that the Han do. The Qing dynasty dealt with China’s diversity in a unique way. The first component of their system for maintaining control over all of the different ethnic groups spread throughout the country was their military. The Qing dynasty put in place an “eight banner” system which divided the military into eight divisions. The army included Chinese people of many different ethnicities, primarily Manchu, Han and Mongol people. Some minority groups, however, were not part of the eight banners system, such as minorities from Yunnan due to their “barbarian” status. The delicate balance between ethnic groups during the Qing dynasty was disturbed, as Han-Hui violence erupted in the mid 19th century. Around this time Anti-Qing advocates began adopting the Japanese term “minzoku” which can be translated as “ethnic groups” (Mullaney 2012). This term is not as neutral as it may first appear, in reality it is used to promote cultural and ethnic essentialism. In the case of the Anti-Qing advocates it was a way of justifying Han-Chinese racism directed at other ethnic groups, specifically the Manchus in this case. During this period the terms “Hanzu” and “Manzu” meaning Han people and Manchu people ​ ​ ​ ​ also came into wide usage (Mullaney 2012). These terms were used to provide clear divides down ethnic groups, making it easier to justify the superiority of Han people. The Guomindang and Communist parties after the fall of the Qing dynasty in the 20th century had very different stances on ethnic diversity in China. Republican nationalists, by creating an Anti-Qing rule that was meant to favor Han Chinese managed to alienate all other ethnic groups in the process. Worried about territory loss the Republican regime introduced the concept of China as a “Republic of Five Peoples”, who were the Han, Tibetans, Mongols, Manchus and Hui (Mullaney 2012). This inclusively attempt was a strategic move on the part of the Republican regime, who believed assimilating these minorities into the Han majority would be necessary to maintain power. Additionally calling China a “Republic of Five Peoples” blatantly ignores the multitude of other ethnic groups within the country. In the struggle for power between the CCP and GMD, minorities within China were an important variable because of the need to unify the country and the threat that minority groups posed in disturbing this unification. Many minority groups lived around China’s borders which made the task of securing the country’s borders more difficult. Later, however the GMD took a different approach for unification, rejecting the notion of China as multinational, claiming that Chinese people were homogenous. Chiang Kai Shek claimed that any difference in the five formerly recognized Chinese people was “territorial as well as religious, but not ethnological”(Mullaney 2012). The Communist party took the exact opposite stance as war with Japan was underway, claiming a dedication to recognizing China’s ethnic minorities in order to prevent divide at the hands of the Japanese. The CCP stressed that it was possible to be both Tibetan, Hui, Manchu or Mongul and still be Chinese while the GMD claimed that this stance would weaken China. The classification of ethnic minorities within China has historically been a very complicated issue and remains so to this day. During Mao’s Long March government officials journeyed to China’s rural Southwest and came into contact with minorities and cultures that they’d never been previously exposed to. This led to the desire to classify all of the different ethnic groups. One of the first attempts at classification after “the Republic of Five Peoples” was in 1953 as the CCP attempted to identify different ethnic groups specifically with Yunnan, China’s most diverse province. Language was quickly identified as an imperfect but practical way of identifying differences between ethnic groups. Some groups proved easier to identify than others, researchers were left with many groups they considered “plausible communities” and “borderline groups” some of whom shared characteristics with other ethnic groups or who’s origins were unclear (Mullaney 2012). This process of taxonomy is one that has spanned decades and was continuously built upon. The identification of minority groups has always been selective, with the government often arbitrarily deciding what constitutes a minority group and what doesn’t in order to promote China’s security and internal stability. The classification of minority groups was not undertaken in order to provide increased recognition and respect for minority groups but instead to further the CCP’s quest for stability and unification. The 1984 Regional Ethnic Autonomy Law has led to five autonomous regions, 30 ​ autonomous prefectures and 120 autonomous counties within China (Mullaney 2012). These areas are divided on the basis on ethnicity and state that members of the minority group that the autonomous area emcompasses are to be the heads of their own local government. This act was put into place in order to preserve local culture, language and tradition as well as to promote development in these areas as they have been historically underdeveloped. These laws that benefit minorities only exist within the autonomous regions, however. The many members of minority groups scattered outside these regions are not afforded the same privileges. Not all minority groups are viewed equally within China. As referenced earlier, in the Qing dynasty viewed people in Yunnan as barbarians while recruiting Hui and Mongul people for their army. Currently in China, a range of different stereotypes exists for different minorities groups. Uyghur people are often thought to be dangerous, Tibetans mystically spiritual, and groups in Yunnan are thought to be friendly but primitive. These stereotypes are incredibly reductionist and dehumanizing. During my interview of a Chinese college student that took place in January 2018 she expressed frustration that she believes people in the U.S. do not know about China’s geographical and ethnic diversity. This frustration seems to indicate that she believes understanding China’s diversity is key for understanding China. Whether this comes from a place of believing in inclusion and equality or a desire to unify the country and maintain control of its many territories is difficult to discern. While many Han Chinese people today recognize that ethnic minorities are Chinese, ethnic minorities being presented as foreign or alien has been common throughout history. During the Tang dynasty, China’s most important literary dynasty, two words were used by many scholars to create a dichotomy between the Han Chinese and all other minorities within China and even those outside of China. Hua, often translated as ​ ​ “Chinese”, was used to talk about Han people. Today Han is a more common term but focus on differentiation between different ethnic groups was not heavily emphasized until the 20th century when classification became important for unification (Abramson 2008). Fan, which can be ​ ​ translated as foreigner, was often used to describe anyone who was not Han. This very exclusionary language reflects the ideology that Han people are superior or the true “Chinese people”. This ideology can not be rooted in a single dynasty or time period, forms of discrimination and subordination of minorities has existed as long as there has been diversity within China and the government has wanted to rule over this diversity. In modern day China, one of the largest barriers in society for many minorities is language. Although some minorities like the Hui and Manchu are native speakers of Putonghua, ​ ​ the predominant language spoken by Han people, many others such as the Uighurs, Tibetans and Mongolians have their own written and spoken languages (Chen 2007). China began focusing on linguistic unification and reform after 1949. In 1982 Putonghua was recognized for the first time ​ ​ in the constitution. Putonghua was the predominant language in China long before being ​ ​ officially recognized in the constitution but this addition marked a promotion of language policy in mainland China. Putonghua is a tool for unifying China, strengthening it against possible ​ ​ outside aggressors. This meant Putonghua also became the official language of education, business, publications and government in China (Chen 2007).