Blanchette | Chinese Nationalism and Neo-Maoism Interviews Chinese Nationalism and Neo-Maoism An interview with Jude Blanchette China’s increasing assertiveness on the international stage has been accompanied by a rising tide of popular nationalism, which finds its clearest expression in social media. However, Chinese nationalism is not monolithic. The term enfolds distinct groups with diverse politics. To understand the complexity of Chinese nationalism, the Journal invited Jude Blanchette, the Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), to share his insights on neo-Maoism and the state of leftist politics in China. Journal: How did you become interested in China and what led you to focus on the neo-Maoist movement? Blanchette: I first became interested in China as an undergraduate student, when I had to choose a place to study abroad. I chose China on a lark, but it was one of the best decisions I have ever made. I spent a year there from 2001 to 2002 studying Chinese. My focus on the neo-Maoist movement began in 2011, when Bo Xilai was the party secretary in Chongqing. He had started this movement of red revivalism, which had the “Sing Red, Strike Black” campaign, and I noticed groups of younger online neti- zens [on neo-Maoist] websites, celebrating not only Bo Xilai’s campaign, but [also] openly supporting Mao Zedong. They were historical revisionists who were looking at issues that I thought were well-settled, like the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, and saying, “actually, things were not that bad.” I just thought this defied so much of what I thought about China. I thought [China] was apolitical, that everyone is just focused on economic livelihoods, that they had given up on politics. [Yet] in the year 2011 [there were] people celebrating a figure that I thought, as an American, was like Hitler or Stalin. Journal: Can you situate neo-Maoism within the wider context of leftist politics in China? Blanchette: Neo-Maoism is a strain of leftist politics. There is a spectrum of various Volume 6 | 2020 [93] Interviews leftist diagnoses of problems in China, and one of the more famous ones is the New Left, which includes figures like Wang Hui and Wang Shaoguang. Neo-Maoism is a more conservative, more statist, leftist political perspective. There are also leftists who are anarchists. So I would say this is a very conservative statist version of leftism. Unfortunately, it is one of the only versions of leftism that is allowed in China. These have to be state-supporting versions of leftism, not radical critiques of China’s political economy. Journal: What are some key insights you present in your recent book, China’s New Red Guards: The Return of Radicalism and the Rebirth of Mao Zedong? What are the implica- tions for neo-Maoism today? Is the movement still active? Blanchette: There is only one core insight for me, which is that political debate is still very much alive in authoritarian China. Even though we look at China as being fairly quiet or monolithic politically and [assume] that everything political comes from the Chinese Communist Party, [my research] was a reminder to me that underneath that exterior of stability is a roiling debate about the future of China. That is very natural, that is what happens in every country. I think I had just assumed after the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, especially after 1992 when Deng Xiaoping tells everyone, “we are done debating,” that the debate ended, but in fact it was very much alive. So, that is the most important insight I take out of the book. I do not actually think [neo-Maoists have] much of an implication for China because the movement has really shifted in its importance over the past several years. It has been caught up, like so many other civil society movements, in the general crackdown on the public square. Neo-Maoism, as an organized movement, does not mean nearly as much as it did during its peak under Bo Xilai, when we thought this was actually a shadow government being built. The ideas that neo-Maoists represent, however, are very important. Neo-Maoists are essentially the visible manifestation of a set of beliefs, and those beliefs, in many ways, are shared by the current leader, Xi Jinping, who is [more open in supporting] China’s past. As Xi Jinping said, “we cannot negate the Mao-era, and we cannot negate the Deng Xiaoping-era, they are both part of our story.” For a long time it had seemed like the General Secretary or the party leadership wanted to ignore the Mao era. It was an inconvenience; it was something dangerous you had to deal with. Xi Jinping is much more comfortable trying to promote certain elements of the Mao period. Not all elements, but certain elements of it. I think there is much in Xi Jinping, in how he articulates his world view, the role he sees for the Chinese Communist Party, and the role he sees for the state economy, that many neo-Maoists would support. So I think the types of ideas that neo-Maoists represent is still very important and alive, even if, as an organized movement, [they] have lost some of that import. Journal: Are there any other examples of grassroots expressions of ideas like those that animate neo-Maoists? [94] Georgetown Journal of Asian Affairs Blanchette | Chinese Nationalism and Neo-Maoism Blanchette: The best example of this is student Marxist groups, which have of course had a difficult time, but were organic expressions of what I would say is Marxist class analysis on China. For a country which is nominally socialist, communist, and Marxist, [class analysis and diagnosis] this is exactly how you would expect students to think of the world. Obviously, the movement has been shut down. But again, that is another indication that this is going to be a recurring theme in China. You will always see individuals rise up to try to help their fellow citizens, in this case, through bringing to bear Marxist analysis on deep structural problems. But also, as Deng Xiaoping said, the real danger for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is on the left. These are the individuals who can challenge the Party on its own ideological grounds. So, I think we are going to continue to see that this be a problem. Journal: In your book, you mention that after the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, China launched a massive patriotic education campaign aiming to inculcate Chinese youth with national pride and party loyalty. Given this historical precedent, do you believe it is possible to rebrand nationalism and a patriotic education curriculum for the youth in Hong Kong? Blanchette: Yes and no, unhelpfully. I think the premise of the question is, Hong Kong youth are really quite savvy, and is any of [this propaganda] going to stick? I would say that Chinese youths in the early 1990s were also very savvy. They were not stupid. They were not brainwashed. They had just come through a decade of pretty remarkable levels of cultural openness and awakening. You watch something like He Shang [River Elegy, a 1988 Chinese documentary critical of Chinese traditional culture] and you can see the extraordinary sophistication with thinking about China and its place in the world, but patriotic education still had an impact. Patriotic education does not necessarily mean that you completely buy what [the Chinese authorities are saying]. It essentially gives citizens a reference point for what is safe; the permissible bounds of discussion. In that case, it is very successful. It demarcates acceptable from non-acceptable. If you put in place a patriotic education campaign in Hong Kong, undeniably you would see an erosion, eradication, or constriction of the public square. There would be a more limited set of ideas which would be discussed. The Chinese Communist Party has been very clear about what is “correct historical interpretation.” That is why in 1981, they came out with a historical resolution. It was essentially to say to everybody that there is no need for debate, this is the correct line. You can discuss history around this correct line, but this is the right line. So I think it would be to some extent effective. Journal: Do you think patriotic education campaigns would be successful in Hong Kong today given that the 2012 protests were sparked by Beijing’s efforts to change the syllabus? Does Beijing still have a chance to do it again? Volume 6 | 2020 [95] Interviews Blanchette: Yes, I do think so. The first patriotic education [campaign] went into effect after the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. That was not a particularly peaceful time either. You had a broad swath of Chinese society that had just come from a really trau- matic period where they were expressing great dissatisfaction with the level of political and economic control the party put in place. This is precisely why the party felt that the patriotic education campaign was so important. In terms of effectiveness, will we find that in a year the whole of Hong Kong starts following the party line? No. Of course not, but I do not think that is the only definition we should have for success. Now there is a tactical issue, which is if I were the Chinese Communist Party, would I put into place a patriotic education campaign right now? The answer is no. However, there is undoubtedly a pretty firm decision in Beijing that we have lost the Hong Kong youths.