THE POLITICAL-ECONOMY OF NANYANG ETHNICITY
By Hugh M. Lewis
1989
Copyright 2000, by Hugh M. Lewis
All Rights Reserved.
Copies of this text may be printed only for classroom or
personal research purposes.
Use
of extraneous text materials is held to be governed by fair-use policy.
Preface
A Brief Introduction to
Nanyang Studies
It has been twelve years since I undertook
writing these texts based upon preliminary bibliographic research in an
Anthropology program in New York. I was at the time heavily influenced by
economic theory and socio-structural theories as well as by literary theory.
My interest in the Overseas Chinese grew from my
travels to Malaysia, fieldwork with the Vietnamese Refugees, who were in fact de
facto Chinese from Vietnam, and of course, marriage to my overseas Chinese wife.
In hindsight, though the contribution of the Chinese historically and culturally
to the civilization and development of Southeast Asia has been significant and
largely down played due to ethnocentric and nationalistic policies of Southeast
Asian nation states and post-colonial regimes, it is also evident to me that the
Chinese had never been politically preponderant in the region, except perhaps
from a remote distance in casting a giant shadow from the mainland and in
relation to the history of Vietnam. Though the Nanyang, as the network of the
overseas Chinese is called in this essay, was vast, far reaching and
considerable especially in terms of its economic integration of the region, I do
not believe that the Nayang was ever identified, either by the Chinese, or their
native counterparts, or by scholars, as such. It was never a coherent
socio-political organization in and of itself. It existed only as implicit to
the network of economic relations that Chinese traders established for
themselves in the Southeast Asian context. This was a vital role, to be sure,
but one that cross-sected competing political boundaries at every corner.
The positions occupied by the Chinese of the
Nanyang, as merchant-middle men, pioneer entrepreneurs, settlers, plantation
owners and managers, as clerks, shop-keepers and wealthy tycoons, was not
unlike the positions that European Jews came to occupy in the traditional
frameworks of the European countries they inhabited. Thus, many of the results
in terms of mass persecution and periodic slaughter of this inbetween
"pariah" group were the same in both instances, and in general, they
serve as parallel analogies to a similar kind of social patterning, albeit with
different origins, directions and histories. The allusion to the overseas
Chinese as the Asian Jewry has been made by others than myself, with far
different implications. But it is, from an economic and structural standpoint, a
valid kind of comparison to make. We seek comparative examples by which to
understand complex social patterns, especially from alternative contexts that
can be said to be relatively independent of the subject at hand.
Since the first writing of this work, I've done
much subsequent research and fieldwork in Southeast Asia in relation to the
Overseas Chinese. I do not claim to be an authority on the topic. The Overseas
Chinese are a heterogeneous lot--they have been affected not only by the
segmental, isolating cleavages of homeland, of language, surname, patrilineage,
etc., but also by the long heritage of the countries in Southeast Asian in which
they resided. Fundamental differences can be found for instance between Chinese
in Thailand and Chinese in Malaysia or Singapore, or those in the Philippines or
those in Indonesia.
The latest violence and turmoil in Indonesia over
the last two years (1999-2001) has almost certainly, in many cases, targeted the
Chinese, especially those who lived and owned small shops in urban or village
areas. The fact that the press plays down this aspect of much of this violence
demonstrates the extent to which the world has ignored the frequent plight and
persecution of the overseas Chinese at the hands of their host peoples.
Southeast Asian governments have frequently found the Chinese to be a convenient
scape-goat when their own people become restless. Thus, one thing that unites
all overseas Chinese is that they in general share a fundamental sense of
structural and existential insecurity and ambivalence of identity in their host
nations. This insecurity and ambivalence to a great extent, like the prostestant
ethics of the spirit of capitalism, becomes translated frequently into intensive
preoccupation and success of these people in economic spheres of activity
especially. More overlooked but no less intensive and interesting has been the
activities of these same people in religionism in the region. To a lesser
extent, the overseas at times have become implicated at high levels in the
political involvement of their nations, but as previously remarked, such
political involvement tends to take the form of alternative clan or lineage
organization, secret society affiliation or trade union involvement. Only in
Singapore have the overseas Chinese managed to establish themselves as
politically preponderant, demonstrating their clear capacity for politic prowess
when the circumstances are conducive to such action.
To focus upon the political economy of the
Nanyang Chinese is to demarcate essential role and structure of the overseas
Chinese in the Southeast Asian setting. Only one caveat should be remarked upon
in this regard. Not all Chinese make excellent businessmen. Many are downright
terrible businessmen. Many chinese are poor and working class. Many are farmers
or fishermen, and others pull trishaws or haul heavy loads. Chinese communities
have their own internal class divisions and cleavages, and they are not all
united in conspiracy against the state. Some Chinese lean toward the left and
others toward the right. But economic participation in trading and
money-handling, in production, transportation and marketing, have been a
enduring and significant occupational niche of these people and their
communities throughout the Souteast Asian setting, and remains so until today.
I would say that the Chinese, unlike many of
their native counterparts, are very practical minded when it comes to business
affairs and family affairs especially. They are quick to see and seize what few
opportunities are available to them, and they are opportunistic in this regard.
But this does not mean that they lack a sense of larger loyalty or commitment to
systems, if they see realistic prospects for the future of their families in
such systems.
The Nanyang
The Chinese of Southeast Asia, or the Nanyang (South Sea)
Chinese, have long been integral to the regional development of Southeast Asia,
probably going back as far as the first century BC, if not earlier.
"…the Chinese communities of the Nanyang are now both
culturally and politically more influenced by their Southeast Asian environments
than by their Chinese motherland. Nor is the use of the plural 'minorities'
without forethought: a recurrent theme…will be the varied ways of adaptation
of these persons of Chinese origin to their countries of residence." (Mary
F. Somers-Heidhues; Southeast Asia's Chinese Minorities: 1-2)
The ethnic Chinese have long been present in every nation
state in Southeast Asia. Like their European counterparts the ethnic Chinese
have long remained significant minorities wherever they have settled. Unlike the
European colonizers and imperialists in Southeast Asia, whose impact was
aggressively sudden, militarily coercive and politically predominating, the
significance of the Chinese influence in Southeast Asia was primarily economic
more than political. Only upon the small island city-state of Singapore did the
overseas Chinese eventually become to politically predominate in Southeast Asia,
and then only upon a precarious 'toe-hold' as a result of Malaysia kicking
Singapore out of the Malaysian union.
"The emergence and formation of Chinese capital in
Southeast Asia was due to the peaceful colonization of that area by Chinese
immigrants and their economic activities. And the Chinese immigrants never
pursued any political aims in those countries nor did they seek to subordinate
them to China." (N. A. Simoniya; Overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia:
39)
The purpose of this paper is to address the hypothetical
problem of the possible political economy underlying Nanyang ethnicity, in order
to delineate the broad outlines of some form of structure that may theoretically
account for or explain the phenomena referred to or related to the notion of
ethnicity. Any structure is in fact only a hypothetical sense of order or a
recognizable pattern or a system or model which is supposed to adequately
account for the interrelated phenomena of interest. In this case a structure is
presumed to refer to consistent and persistent sets of recurring processes that
have some measure of historical continuity through time and geographical
presence across a wide area, a region that in this case is specifically
Southeast Asia.
Because these processes have some recognizable form of
consistency through time and across space, they are held to represent recurrent
patterns that are the manifestations of larger and enduring regional structures.
Structures endure historically on account of regional and cultural conditions
even though there may occur periodically a complete turnover of individual
personalities and organizations who are caught up within and involved with the
activation of these patterns. Structures may even endure human social
organizations that makes them happen--enduring through the life cycles of many
such organizations.
The particular kind of structure this paper is concerned to
elucidate may more appropriately be called political-economic substructure that
underlies and enables the hermeneutical understanding of the surface patterning
of ethnicity; in particular, of a certain historically particular kind of
ethnicity described euphemistically as Nanyang Chinese.
At the outset several preliminary points must be properly
delineated before the central theoretical problem can be broached.
1. It is to be inferred that the phenomenon of ethnicity is
somehow epi-phenomenal to some other processes, that it alone does not
adequately account for itself as something self evidently in and of itself but
is presumed to be something, a process or occurrence, which needs to be
explained by something else to which it is somehow related. Thus ethnicity in
general is presumed to be representative of some kind of more basic or
preexisting structure that gives rise to it or causes it, thus standing for that
other structure. By this thesis if ethnicity has some kind of structure of its
own, that serves to distinguish it and characterize it, to make it recognizable
as ethnicity as such wherever it is experience or happens, then this structure
did not just come on its own, but only arises in relation to some other
structural form which is its precondition.
2. The inference of the title is that somehow political
economy is the underlying structure of the phenomena of ethnicity, such that if
properly elucidated may its understanding might sufficiently account for
the occurrence of ethnic phenomena in general or in particular. This is in lieu
of some other possible form of substructure or prestructure that may just as
adequately and parsimoniously account for ethnic phenomena. It is the thesis of
this paper that in actuality political economy represent but a duality of
dimensions of a more complex kind of structure which has several other important
dimensions, namely religious, social, psychological and cultural. This kind of
multidimensional structure not only provides a sufficient account of ethnicity
but more importantly serves as the basis of definition of the dimensionalities
of the structure itself. In other words, it may be employed to account for a
wide variety of other kinds of 'problematic' phenomena as well. Political
economy is merely a point of entry towards defining the whole problematical
structure.
3. As the initial purpose of this paper is stated, the
meaning and definition of what is ethnicity is left to the inferred only and has
been defined only implicitly as something epi-phenomenal which stands for
something else. This does not imply that ethnicity as a phenomena is somehow in
and of itself unreal or inadequate, that it cannot stand on its own terms or
even that it may, in its own way be pre-phenomenal in relation to something else
which stands in relationship to it as epi-phenomenal. Ethnicity as a
recognizable phenomena of experience has a substantial, phenomenological ground
in human reality and this may be said to have its own structure that may give
rise to other kinds of phenomena to which it is related.
4. The notion of a somehow historically particular or general
Nanyang. Ethnicity as a real phenomena or set of phenomena is presumed to be
important enough to include in the title without clearly elucidating the
parameters of these phenomena. Whether Nanyang ethnicity is to be treated as
somehow privileged among possible kinds of ethnicity has somehow representative
or demonstrative of the structural processes underlying all possible forms of
ethnicity is taken for granted. Why Nanyang and not some other instance of the
general phenomena of ethnicity particularly exemplifying of this generality
remains to be answered or demonstrated and though defensible cannot be
conclusively answered except perhaps by default. Why not some other ethnicity? I
will reverse the order of these points and proceed backwards in their
clarification before going on to the central problematical topic of 'the
political economy of Nanyang ethnicity'.
This paper will seek to answer, then, the following questions
in this order:
1. Why Nanyang ethnicity?
2. What is ethnicity and its structure?
3. How does political economy and other dimensions
prestructure ethnicity in general and Nanyang ethnicity in particular?
4. How does the structure of ethnicity in general come to
stand for some kind of underlying substructure or set of substructures pertinent
to the predicament and distinctive style patterning of the Nanyang Chinese?
******
1. In answer to why the Nanyang, it is important to
understand what it is. The Nanyang or the "Southern Ocean" used to be
the Chinese equivalent of Southeast Asia as it was then known--Nanyang refers to
those Southeastern territories that were reached by the overseas Chinese people
via the South China Sea. These overseas Chinese of the Nanyang form a distinct
nation within many different nations, within the Southeast Asian region and
beyond, a nation whose only real territory was a sort of socio-structural space
within a larger regional framework and the freedom of the South China Sea
itself. They are the heterogeneous quasi-citizens of a Nanyang trading empire
that had its own social structure, common culture and political economic
organization but whose only territorial boundaries were the social and colonial
boundaries around their "Chinatowns." "Nanyang Trade" was
the principal raison d'être of this truly interregional, extra-territorial
nation. It was truly an imperium in imperio "a power within a power;
an empire within an empire; a state within a state." But it was not just
one, but many such states within states organized into a loose confederacy
labeled the Nanyang Nation.
It was really a nation without external territorial
boundaries, one with a national kind of culture and a distinctive style of
civilization. Its boundaries though are not geo-political but mostly
socio-cultural. The Nanyang Chinese have been more culturally influenced by the
Nanyang itself than by their common Chinese homeland. They form a heterogeneous
population--varied adaptations to a regional environmental mosaic hat has led to
a great range of cultural and social diversity--though all within a single
Nanyang continuum.
"The complex set of identities, or organizations which
may be built upon them are most visible from the inside. Viewed from the
outside, the Chinese look, to most Southeast Asians as simply
Chinese--notoriously persistently Chinese." (Brown 1976: 96-97)
The Nanyang nation has several unusual features unlike the
usual geo-political nation state. It is a marginal state composed almost
entirely of overseas immigrants which exists mostly within the interstices
between local and global socio-structural frameworks. This structural
marginality of the Nanyang accounts for a variety of interrelated
characteristics of the Nanyang citizenry. Nanyang citizenship or ethnic
identity, has long been overshadowed by a fundamental structural ambivalence and
basic insecurity of existential precariousness. They are a people within many
different countries but without a real homeland. The Nanyang Nation exists now
only as a fictive cultural region of history books about Southeast Asia.
Making money, and making money make money, and making money
in order to make money has been essentially the only form of security which the
Nanyang people have ever had. It has been their most persistent pattern in the
past, becoming the structure of their Nanyang tradition and it is their only
safe guarantee of future security, making the structure of their Nanyang
ideology for meeting the future. A people politically dispossessed and
existentially precarious, making lots of money becomes the only real substantial
form of security that they can afford. This is the basis of the political
economy of Nanyang ethnicity.
The question of ethnic overseas Nanyang identity in Southeast
Asia remains a veritable conundrum--both and neither the People's Republic of
China and the Nationalist Government of Taiwan claim them as citizens as so do
many of the Southeast Asian national governments simultaneously persecute and
discriminate against them, rejecting their full citizenship status or else
seeking to coercively assimilate them, but usually only upon certain partial or
a conditional basis. If there remains a single common thread to Nanyang identity
in Southeast Asia, then it is this double hyphenated citizenship to a Nanyang
quasi nation that only really existed in the mercantile networks of overseas
Chinese entrepreneurs and their communities or enclaves. The inherent ambiguity
of their ethnic status reflects the existential ambiguity of their shared
political economy as merchant middlemen--their primary means of livelihood and
social organization and cultural survival as a distinctive grouping of people
with a common heritage and historical tradition. In a sense, the plastic success
of modern hyper modern neo-colonial Singapore as an ethnic overseas Chinese
Mercantile City State, the capital of the Nanyang Nation, is the concentrated,
distilled crystallization of a Nanyang empire which might have been given a
different turn of historical events, but now will never be. In every other
Southeast Asian nation, the overseas Chinese must face an existential fate of
choosing between enforced assimilation with a loss of face--the abolition of a
distinctive cultural identity and an acceptance of structural discrimination and
inequality, or else coerced emigration--on a few occasions they have been faced
with genocide and ethnocide.
In order to answer the why Nanyang we are now in a position
to examine more carefully the profile of ethnicity of Nanyangness. Like the
Chinese from both an etic and emic viewpoint and then to see how this ethnicity
becomes prestructured within a framework of a certain kind of colonial political
economy.
Unlike most other minorities of Southeast Asia, the ethnic
Chinese are not geographically isolated or separated--only socio-culturally
so--most of them inhabit urban areas, but not exclusively so. Without a common
territorial identity to reinforce or ground their ethnic national identity for
the ethnic Chinese the question of common Chinese origin and common Chinese
traditional heritage become more crucial, even more so among the half caste
Babas and Peranakans such that present day Chinese minorities strive to buttress
their separate identity through essentially cultural institutions in particular
schools and the Chinese language press. Most of these ethnic Chinese are engaged
in trade and form extensive geo-political, supranational networks of commerce
and communication over the South China Sea which in range and sophistication are
matched by none others in the region. "This is far more complex than mere
contact with the motherland or some other two way trading path; it involves a
net of relationships within Southeast Asia, focusing on Singapore and Hong Kong
and extending out to the Japanese, Europeans and North American markets and
sources of capital, as well as to China and Taiwan. Commercial considerations
and not political loyalties draw this network together." (Mary Somers-Huedhues:
2)
Being a citizen of the Nanyang is largely a matter of
situation, circumstance and self definition....
"As one scholar puts it, 'Being a Chinese is, in
Southeast Asia, essentially a matter of self identification.' .... The
imprecision of the definition makes an exact count of the 'Chinese' an
impossible undertaking, not least because many persons consider themselves
'Chinese' in some contexts, but not in others…" (Heidhues; 1974: 2-3)
It is even more curious in this regard that the Peranakans
and Baba communities, more assimilated than Chinatown ghettos usually considered
themselves to be more genuinely, more traditionally Chinese, even more so than
the newcomer Chinese sinkehs or totoks who were considered of inferior status.
Even these communities while presenting a united 'face' of being Chinese were
quite varied and internally divided:
Regardless of the exact origin of the terms, it must be made
quite clear that in the context of the present study the three terms are used
interchangeably and as synonyms, and are used only to refer to those Straits
born Chinese who developed the syncretic culture which is the distinguishing
characteristic of this group of indigenized Singaporean and Malaysian Chinese.
At the same time, it must be made clear that this is not to say that the Straits
Chinese formed an entirely homogeneous culture or one that did not change over
time. Straits Chinese society was differentiated by dialect origin…by locality
of origin (whether Malacca or elsewhere), by social class and economic division
and by religion. In the 19th century the women had already long
adopted their characteristically modified form of Malay costume, but the men
continued to wear Chinese dress, and to arrange their hair in the traditional
queue, although being well outside of the influence of the Manchu empire they
had no reason to adhere to this 'badge of servitude' (as Vaughn phrased it).
Indeed this Chineseness in outer appearance (of people who often could not speak
or read the Chinese language) struck Vaughn as a very intriguing aspect of early
Baba culture:
"One may see in Malacca Babas who can claim no
connection with China for centuries, clad in long jackets, loose drawers and
black skull caps, the very counterparts of Chinese to be seen any day at Amoy,
Chusan or under the walls of Nankin. Strange to say that although the Babas adhere
so loyally to the customs of their progenitors they despise the real Chinaman
and are exclusive fellows indeed; nothing they rejoice in more than being
British subjects. The writer has seen Babas on being asked if they were
Chinaman bristle up and say in an offended tone 'I am not a Chinaman, I am a
British subject', an Orang Putih literally, a white man: this term is
invariably applied to an Englishman. They have social clubs of their own to
which they will admit no native of China. At those clubs they play at billiards,
bowls or other European games and drink brandy and soda ad libitum; yet
they adhere strictly to the Chinese costume--the queue, thick soled shoes,
mandarin dresses and conical hats on state occasions and the manners and customs
of those people who otherwise have no sympathies with …" (J. D. Vaughn; 'The
Manners and Customs of the Chinese of the Straits Settlements', 1971 in Straits
Chinese Society by John R. Clammer, 1980: 5-6)
The Nanyang Nation provided a cultural mode from which may
indigenous peoples of Southeast Asia learned and borrowed and applied to their
own existential predicaments vis-à-vis European colonial masters. The strength
of the Nanyang Nation existed in the strength of adherence to this common
identity of overseas 'Chineseness'--its ability to organize and mobilize Nanyang
resources, principally people and capital, to secure and improve its political
economic basis for existence.
"It was apparent that the strength of the Chinese lay in
communal solidarity and organizational sophistication.... To put it briefly, the
Chinese demonstrated the means and utility of political modernization to
increasingly receptive audiences. Paradoxically, the Southeast Asian nationalist
campaigns that were initially so indebted to the overseas Chinese for technical
guidance eventually turned against their mentors, for anti-Sinicism became a
conspicuous feature of them all." (Lea E. Williams; Southeast Asia: A
History, 1976: 171)
Nanyang ethnicity and Nanyang nationality is a sort of model
or a set of interrelated models, which serve both to structure our understanding
of its phenomena and which provides a common point of reference, a baseline
which serves as a guideline which sanctions for correct citizenship behavior. It
is a malleable, plastic model. Itis polythetic and polythematic, with its only
common element being some strange chameleon form of Chineseness. It is a set or
complex political economic vulnerability and insecurity which becomes somehow
translated into persistent patternings of entrepreneurial business activity
within a supranational trade network and into consistent kinds or modes of
social structural organizations called segmentary corporate groupings along
primarily sub-ethnic, occupational and familial lines and finally the social
functioning of exploitative and competitive class relations. These common
patternings have their origins in a shared heritage, a common historical
background, and a shared identity within a regional Southeast Asian context and
post colonial framework which serves to render the ethnic overseas Chinese of
the Nanyang similarly vulnerable in a similarly perceived set of existential
circumstances and similarly adaptive throughout the Nanyang Nation.
In returning to the question once more of why Nanyang, it
becomes clear that the rationale of this paper is to elucidate the existential
ethnic predicament of what are figuratively referred to as the floating Chinese
of the Nanyang who have become the flotsam and jetsam of dramatically developing
situations of political economic complexity. It is my contention that this broad
based, trans-national, regionally defined sub-grouping of humanity shares a
common political economic situation and inter-ethnic orientation which serves to
historically define and existentially reinforce a shared Nanyang ethnicity and
Nanyang nationality or Nanyang citizenship.
This loose status role grouping of humanity is comparable to
the European Jewry before WW11 to such an extent that they have been aptly if
somewhat ignominiously and derogatively referred to as the Asian Jewry. The
elucidation of the possible socio-structural dimensionalities of Nanyang
ethnicity as representatively grounding and illustratively elaborating an
alternative theory of structural functional process and patterning is important
because the political economic structures characteristic of this inbetween
status role grouping of humanity is particularly exemplifying the socio
structural interrelationships between different persons and different groupings
of people in a cultural historical framework and as deterministically
demonstrative of the consequential changes in these interrelationships between
different people and their groupings.
The Nanyang are not the only grouping of humanity possibly
relevant to such a study, nor are they necessarily the best possible such
grouping, but they are clearly a good example, combining the paradox of being
quite anomalous in many regards with being quite representative in many other
regards. Though they are well documented objects of study, better than any other
similar such groupings, their studies do not as yet represent a closed book. The
universal relevance of the past, present and future does not diminish with the
objective distanciation of being definitively different.
2. What is ethnicity and what is its phenomenological
structure in an of itself, and how might this structure underlie or
pre-structure other forms of phenomena?
The unabridged 1983 Webster's Dictionary defines ethnic as
'1. A heathen; a pagan. [Obs.] 2. A member of an ethnic group, especially a
member of a minority or nationality group that is part of a larger community.'
This definition carries a connotation of rank order status of
superiority/inferiority or of a value orientation of hierarchy within a larger
communal or community framework.
Ethnic or ethnical is derived from the Greek ethnikos
which meant 'national, foreign' coming from ethnos which meant 'a
company, people, nation.' Ethnic is defined as 'designating or of any of the
basic divisions or groups of mankind, as distinguished by customs,
characteristics, language, etc.; ethnological.' Ethno- is a combining
form meaning race, peoples as in ethno-history, ethno-centrism
or ethnology. Ethnicity refers to ethnic identity or 'ethnic
classification or affiliation'. Ethnocentrism implies the 'attitude of pride or
hubris', 'the emotional attitude that one's own race, nation or culture is
superior to all others.' Ethno also forms the root of both the basic
branches of cultural anthropology--ethnography as 'that branch of anthropology
that deal descriptively with specific cultures, especially those of primitive
peoples or groups' and of ethnology, defined as 'the branch of anthropology that
deals with the comparative cultures of various peoples, including their
distribution, folkways, etc.' Ethnogeny is that branch which deals with national
or racial origins. Ethnarchy might refer to the state of the rule by a people,
or over a people, of a particular province. There is another, less frequently
acknowledged connection to ethos, stemming from the Greek ethos
meaning 'an accustomed place or habitation; hence habit, custom, character', and
which is defined as '1. The characteristic and distinguishing attitudes, habits,
etc. of a racial, political, occupational or other group.' Ethos forms the root
of ethnology defined as 'the science of ethics or morality.' We have in a
condensed form the raison d'être and rationale of cultural anthropology as
ethnography, ethnology and ethnogeny, to describe, explain and compare folkways,
habits, customs and character or the 'ethos' of different groupings of
humankind. If it is on one hand a descriptive, explanative and comparative
'science' it is always also a normative 'science' dealing with values,
stereotypes and existential choices.
Ethnicity has come to mean several things at once--ethnic
identity, ethnic classification and finally ethnically related studies or the
study of ethnicity, implying the study of ethnic diversity or difference. There
is a broad scope for ethnic studies which are theoretically divided alone
several lines. One such orientation is to study ethnicity as primarily a matter
of common origins, tending to conflate the notions of race, culture, ethnic
groups and nationalities. This primordialist orientation may be contrasted with
several other orientations--the structuralist, looking for structurally related
mechanisms for resource acquisition, mobilization along ethnic boundaries as
ecologically adapted to an 'eco-niche' or eco-tone and as competing interest
groups within a single eco-zone, or in an underclass perspective of
majority-minority relations.
This comes from a cultural pluralism orientation
characteristic of complex heterogeneous societies. These studies focus upon
interethnic relations, particularly unequal or competitive relations and often
tend to be written from an 'assimilationist' perspective often seeing the
problem as being one of successful integration within a larger host
society--primarily political economic integration.
A multi-cultural perspective sees the peaceful coexistence of
many or several or more than a single ethnic group. A cultural continuum sees
the breakdown of ethnic boundaries and a range of alternative ethnic choices
available to members of a society, a kind of existential ethnicity.
The symbolic perspective sees culture or ethnic groupings as
a repository and repertory of historically acquired symbols which may be
differentially used to create alternative ethnic identities. Some of these
symbols are internally oriented and are primarily religious in character,
concerned with cultural purity or sacredness, others are political, concerned
externally with creating and maintaining ethnic boundaries and control.
Symbolists are primarily concerned with the phenomena of ethnic identification
and of ethnic consciousness and of how ethnic symbol systems create and maintain
such identities and consciousness. The study of ethnic groups involves also the
classification of different ethnic phenomena and therefore the development of
some kind of ethnic typology.
"Accordingly, an ethnic community proper, or ethos in
the narrow sense of the word, may be defined as a historically formed aggregate
of people who share common, relatively stable specific features of culture
(including language) and psychology, realization of their unity and
distinctiveness from other similar aggregates of people as well as the self
nomination." (Yu. V. Bromley; On the Typology of Ethnic Communities,
1978: 18)
The Soviet ethnos theory fits within a Marxist framework
which views ethnic processes as evolutionary historical phenomena which are
determined by political economic factors. Other theoretical conceptionings of
ethnic phenomena tend to be framed more implicitly within other kinds of
orienting paradigms. Immanuel Wallerstein, in his world systems theory, does not
readily distinguish between classifications of nations, nationalities, peoples,
ethnic groups but all these terms denote variants of a single phenomenon which
he terms ethno-nations, identifiable by their functioning within the world
economy as a whole rather than as merely the consequence of existing within
separate nation states.
By this criteria, ethnic analysis must consider the relative
positioning of a grouping within the world economy, distinguishing the range of
interests between core, periphery and semi-periphery. "The meaning of
ethnic consciousness in a core area is considerably different from that of
ethnic consciousness in a peripheral area precisely because of different class
positions such ethnic groups have in a world economy." (I. Wallerstein; The
Capitalist World Economy, 1979: 24-5) In the semi-peripheral position of the
Nanyang, ethnic consciousness and status becomes inter-class and relative in its
juxtapositioning between the core and the periphery. From the point of view of
the core it remains peripheral in character and from the point of view of the
periphery it resembles the core. In its ethnic unity the Nanyang is
intrinsically divided by the dual economy of its structural existence. The
function of its peculiar ethnic consciousness is to span this inherently
ambiguous structural division.
It is important to adopt a multidimensional perspective upon
the conceptioning of phenomena we refer to as ethnical, one which openly sees
the truth and limitations of all the theoretical orientations about ethnicity.
Ethnicity as a conception and as a set of interrelated phenomena incorporates
inherently into its meaning the connotation of diversity, of unity in diversity.
Thus there can be no single pat definition that adequately accounts for the
complete range of diversity of ethnic phenomena. It is better to see such
phenomena as somehow cohering together into a system that exhibits a patterned
form or coherent structure. This system represents a complex interaction of many
elements and is somehow processual in its happening. This brings the
conceptioning of ethnicity clearly within the hermeneutical circle of the
horizon of historicity. If it exists as something all its own, then this
something is clearly a phenomenological process with its own characteristic
historical patterning.
In this sense, it is better to refer to the process of
ethnicity as ethnization which sees ethnicity metaphorically as a mode of
information and a mode of realization. It is an open ended metaphor which
through its extended application and reapplication to historically situated and
particular phenomena, accretes new meanings to itself and creates a growing,
ever increasing base for its application. It is an organizational or referential
metaphor which has its own kind of metaphysical and epistemological implications
and ramifications.
Realities and realistic issues deemed important become
ethnicized when cast in terms of the ethnical 'language game' that serves to
define itself and thereby create and justify itself. If ethnic categories did
not officially exist previous to a study of ethnic boundaries which are evident
in a complex community, then the researcher is bound to manufacture such
categories in order to fill in the gap in his own worldview. The study of
ethnicity as objective science can not be completely or safely separated from
the processural creation or ideological promotion of ethnic boundaries after the
fact of their existence in the ethnically minded view of human reality.
Ethnic groupings or communities, then, must be construed as
organismic entities with a life style of their own. These groupings occur in
relation, in ecological symbiosis or interaction, in adaptation to a certain
kind of environmental context, both social and physical. They are cybernetic
systems which are or become synergistic in the creation of their distinctive
style of living that is structurally and functionally, ecologically adapted to a
perceived environment. Historical accident enters into this process, in the form
of unpredictable human agency and tends to destabilize the entire synergistic
process.
Scientifically explaining the structure or adaptive functions
of an ethnic process or style is not necessarily a complete understanding of the
meanings and phenomena coherent in or through that style. The synergistic raison
d'être of that ethnic style extends beyond and encompasses that structural
functional explanation, that by analysis of its parts and interrelations between
parts is alone insufficient to completely account for the occurrence of ethnic
process.
The difference here is precisely the difference between etic
and emic approaches to studying ethnic phenomena. The structural/functional
explanation of objective science is clearly the etic approach of an outsider
looking in who sees the actors toing and froing but who cannot presume to know
the intelligence of the system he observes, the individual motives and
rationales of those participants within the system.
To adopt an emic approach of an insider looking out is to
gain through the membership-role process a more genuine understanding of why the
people are engaged within the system, but it is also to lose sight of the forest
for the trees. Objective etic assignation of structural explanations for ethnic
culture amounts to no more than rendering that culture spurious'to an extraneous
context of relations. It de-authenticates the coherent and inherent meanings by
their appropriation and distanciation from their original existence.
The real problem is to see ethnicity from both points of view
as a dialectical reading/writing of its culture. Ethnicity is made up of
symbolic and metaphorical models with both intrinsic and extrinsic meanings,
both emic and etic understandings, both endogenous and exogenous raisons
d'être. Within this dialectic scientific explanations and humanistic
understandings come full circle as contrapuntally complementary processes whose
patterning, a dialectical dance, completes and then repeats a hermeneutical
circle.
The arc of these trace patterning forms the historical
horizon which is unbroken in which ever direction we look, which is ever
receding in which ever direction we move. The real problematic is to see the
historical horizon for what it is, in and of itself, as defining the metalogical
boundaries for our own pre-understandings. The way we understand and see the
world conditions the selectivity of the phenomena which we experience,
conditions the ways we perceive, or choose to see the world of human reality.
Consciousness awakening or enlightenment that we strive for in our understanding
of human reality is the dispelling of our own ignorance and prejudices of our
conceptuality and perceptuality--the reflexive meat-logic of the apperception of
our own pre-understandings--the self-reflective recognition of our own
historical/hermeneutical event horizons of our own consciousness.
The thesis of this paper is that the understanding of Nanyang
ethnicity in particular and of ethnical phenomena in general, must proceed as a
dialectic of etic and emic points of view, demonstrating how this dialectical
interplay between exogenous and endogenous elements and interrelationships
creates a synergistic patterning that is distinctively and characteristically
ethnic in nature, culture and structure.
The etic perspective proceeds from a structural functional
analysis of the exogenous processes which create and maintain ethnically
identifiable phenomena. The emic perspective proceeds from a symbolic
identification of endogenous processes and patterns, notably the problems of
ethnic consciousness, ethnic self-identity and ethnic symbolization. The overall
dialectic between etic and emic, endogenous and exogenous, it will refer to as
the cybernetic system or the synergistic process of ethnicization of human
social reality.
3. How does the political economy and other structural
dimensions pre-structure ethnicity in general and Nanyang ethnicity in
particular? To do justice to this question involves a lengthy recursive review
of the ideas related to the structural dimensionally underlying ethnic phenomena
in general and the political economic dimensionally of the problem of Nanyang
ethnicity in particular.
It is important to reiterate a previous point made in
passing, that the basic definition of ethnic carries with it a connotation of
hierarchy within a larger communalistic framework. This relates to the idea of
ethnarchy. It is important to emphasize that this larger framework is
structurally social, political, economic, religious and cultural in
dimensionally. These dimensions will always be more or less present in the
consideration of ideal ethnic phenomena. In actuality, some dimensions become
over emphasized or over determined while some are ignored or inconspicuously
absent. Indeed, in the experiential realization of ethnic phenomena, some
aspects are recognizable preeminent, while others may see, trivial or irrelevant
as a center of focus of critical attention. The connotation of ethnarchy as
implying ethnic inferiority, difference, subordination and rank ordering is from
an historical perspective preeminently a process of colonial
institutionalization or colonialization of an ethnic grouping of
humanity within a larger structural framework. This can be a matter of internal
colonization in terms of structural inequality, segregation and discrimination,
or external in terms of an established, politically reinforced core-periphery or
heartland-hinterland interrelationship. This implies a relationship of hierarchy
or asymmetrical power relations.
Colony comes from the Latin colonus, meaning a
husbandman and from colere meaning to cultivate. It is defined: '1. A
group of people who settle in a distant land but remain under the political
jurisdiction of their native land. 2. The region thus settled. 3. A territory
distant from the state having jurisdiction or nominal control over it…4. A
community of people of the same nationality or pursuits concentrated in a
particular district or place…5. Such district or place.' Colonization implies
political control at a distance primarily for economic interests and
pursuits. External colonization refers to geographical distance while
internal colonization refers to relative social distance between sub-groupings
within a shared community framework. A colony also implies a kind of boundary
around a given territory or region of settlement separating it from its host
environment.
The fact that the conceptioning of ethnicity as a useful
analytical and cognitive marker has become an important and salient concern in
more recent times is indicative of the underlying colonial implications
of the notion of ethnicity and of its socio cultural political economic and
religious interrelationships between groupings of humanity. Furthermore,
this primarily colonial significance of ethnicity has a concise history
which can be clearly divided into for stages of development--the pre-colonial,
the colonial, the imperialistic and the post colonial phases. These phases
correspond exactly with the historical stages of the modern development of
European civilization. If we remain today in the midst of what has somewhat
nomothetically classified as a capitalist world economy, then it is true by
virtue of the historical fact European imperialism and colonial development, and
the enduring structural relations of a post colonial political economy which
remains primarily Euro-centric. This explains our current involvement in the
Middle East and Latin America and our recent past involvement in Southeast Asia.
If this is indeed a capitalist world economy, then it remains a post colonial
political economy. And if nation-states remain the principal participants of a
capitalist world market, then ethnic sub-groupings of humanity have become the
post colonial pawns of political economic trade and barter.
The political economic social structure of the colonial
framework in which to understand ethnicity leads to a consideration of the
concept of dual economy--essentially the need to articulate traditional village
economics, micro-political economics at the local level, with a world wide
market political economy. Social structure was the underlying factor of such a
colonial setting. The strategy of the colonialist was to divide and conquer and
to interpose a third minority group to mediate the articulation.
If the social and economic situation and the discussion
surrounding it sound surprisingly contemporary so does Boeke's interpretation of
the situation. Boeke draw attention to the unifying force of capitalism in
Europe and asked why capitalism did not exert a similar influence in Southeast
Asia (Boeke; 1961: 171). He showed how mass products from the colonial
metropolitan countries destroyed native handicraft and trade to Southeast Asian
indigenous societies.
"…capitalism only offered new products and did not
provide any new sources of labor. From a social point of view its effect was
destructive rather than constructive. Instead of enriching the pattern of
oriental society it made forms of social activity superfluous…The development
of the West meant the retrenchment and diminishing differentiation of the
East." (Boeke; 1961: 171-173). (Hans-Dieter Evers; 1980: 2)
It is my contention that the structural relations underlying
Nanyang ethnicity were different and modified by each of the phases of political
economic colonization in Southeast Asia--with increasing political economic
interest and immigration of sojourning Chinese to the Nanyang. As a result the
characteriological nature of Nanyang ethnicity became transformed fundamentally
with each succeeding phase.
What is of greatest relevance to the theoretical
understanding is that the Nanyang overseas Chinese have always played an important
role in the historical development of Southeast Asian civilization--a
role gradually increasing in importance that cannot be ignored in the
understanding of the emergence of modern Southeast Asia. Nanyang ethnicity as a
regional maritime merchant grouping gave emphasis to enduring trade patterns and
structural relations regionally in Southeast Asia which persist until the
contemporary era. Nanyang ethnic groups mediated the transition and pioneered
the political economic development from a pre-colonial frontier into a post
colonial national international trade association. Each of the periods was
characterized by increasing immigration of Nanyang Chinese into Southeast Asia
and a subsequent growth and spread of Nanyang Chinese settlements and colonies.
There occurred simultaneously a corresponding diversification of Chinese
economic interests in the Southeast Asian economies, along with an increasing
complex degree of social organization of the Nanyang Chinese society and along
with an increasing intensity of Chinese involvement in Southeast Asian political
economic interests.
The object of this brief overview of Nanyang ethnicity is to
consider closely the case of the political economy of maintaining ethnic group
boundaries. It remains profitable for the few haves who inherited a colonial
apparatus of leadership and control to exaggerate and perpetuate ethnic
solidarity and in-group/out-group prejudices in the name of nationalistic
solidarity, at the expense of the many have-nots of both camps whose cries for
democracy, communality and equality remain unheeded. Ethnic conflict fomented by
competing political economic interest serves as a useful smoke-screen masking
intra-group class differences and tensions arising from the inequities of wealth
and power and mediated by a middleman bureaucracy and marketplace which
protects, masks and promotes the hierarchy of interests. "Both Malay and
Chinese national elites, in the communal formula established before independence
and still holding rather firmly, are responsible to the masses of their own
ethnic communities." (Strauch; 1981: 12)
"…political elites are among those realizing rapid
increases in personal wealth while inequalities in income distribution
nationally are seen to be growing…The radical analysis now current is summed
up by one writer as follows: 'While the origins of ethnic conflict can be traced
to the colonial past, its continued presence today must be attributed to the
post colonial state and the manipulation of ethnic issues by Malay bureaucrat
capitalists in their drive for more and more economic power.'" (Southeast
Asia Chronicle, April 1980, from Strauch; 1981: 23)
Ultimately, we are dealing with the socio-political
structural interrelationships between political power and economic advantage--on
one hand how economic resources, opportunities, skills and motivations underlie
and empower political organizations of power and on the other hand, how power
and political control in turn decisively determines and critically conditions
economic change, development and differential access to resources. Inter-group
conflict represents the competitive schismogenesis of intra-group tensions.
"…the path to leadership lay chiefly in social influence obtained through
acquisition of economic power. In other words, wealth and social power went hand
in hand (as they still do)." (Chin; 1981: 79)
Ethnic identity becomes the in-group repression of within
group differences. Ethnic stereotype and discrimination becomes the out-group
projection of between group differences. Possibilities for becoming within both
groups becomes closed and one way, limited to a solitary course of action, a
single minded orientation and a monopolar ideological directionality. Ethnic
conflict and competition becomes the zero sum game in which both parties are
bound to lose--a game of dominance submission in which one group will succeed at
the loss of the other. History written in a nationalistic idiom serves to
legitimate and rationalize this deadly game. Development, however ill defined,
becomes the one sided promise of social progress. Development, like ethnicity,
to which it is inextricably tied, becomes inseparably both political and
economic in character.
Power enacts change, creates it, directs it, destroys it,
controls its--economics enables change, facilitates it, empowers it. Power is
the form of change, the vehicle, economics is its substance, its content.
Development can never be only economic or only political--development must
always carry political implication. There can be no such thing as any pure
economic theory which is 'uncorrupted' by the action of politics.
"...we can readily perceive how ethnic labels conceal
the underlying struggle for the appropriation of certain economic, political and
social advantages among the different racial and status groups in the wider
Malaysian society…" (Lawrence K. L. Siaw; The Legacy of Malaysian
Chinese Social Structure)
This understanding of the colonial political economic
ramifications of ethnicity must furthermore be fit within the framework of
competing interest groupings operating within a post colonial global political
economic market still dominated by western power. In order to do so, it is
necessary to recognize the preeminent position of Nanyang Chinese in this world
market political economy as intermediary marginal minority middleman merchants
serving in their designated status roles as mediating-articulators between a
local level and international level market political economies. Historically,
these people have long occupied a middle stratum in an essentially colonial
political economy structured around the marketplace. According to Immanuel
Wallerstein, this middle stratum is a crucial part of the normal 'three layered
structure' upon which the world capitalist system depends. "In a world
empire, the middle stratum is in fact accorded the role of maintaining the
marginally desirable long distance luxury trade, while the upper stratum
concentrates its resources on controlling the military machinery which can
collect the tribute, the crucial mode of redistributing surplus…" (Wallerstein;
Inequalities of Core and Periphery: 23)
The Nanyang empire, in other words, exists in the
'semi-periphery' of the world capitalist political economy. This semi-periphery
is the distance between the bottom and the top--the political economic vertical
stratification between core and periphery. It exists primarily for political
purposes of stability, in order to serve as a buffer in the conflict laden
tensions between the core and the periphery. It is bought off from the top and
becomes the scapegoat for injustices from the bottom. It is both exploited and
exploiter without political legitimacy or independence. It is a commercial urban
middle stratum containing pressures toward cultural homogenization and in a
marginal discontinuous position rendering them constantly vulnerable to conflict
or confiscation.
In a sense the political economic dimensions of ethnicity
defines the conception of ethnicity as a status role--the status end of
the continuum being largely the political dimension, while the role end of the
continuum is largely the economic dimension of ethnicity. As a status role
defined somewhere along a political economic continuum, ethnicity is a category
of social organization which ties the individual actor or agent to some kind of
phenomenon on a colonial institution as somewhere between class stratification
and caste differentiation. Whereas class may be seen as largely a vertical form
of social division, caste may be referred to as primarily horizontal division.
Ethnic group identity is then in a sense a diagonal social stratification in
which the horizontal bar has been skewed and the vertical order has also been
tilted. This skewing of a traditional social order is the result of the opening
of political economic competition between ethnically defined social groupings
that tend to cross cut both horizontal and vertical axis of class/caste stratum.
This occurs in a modern world market place, largely in primate urban centers, in
which greater opportunities for resource acquisition present themselves. In an
industrial setting--the proletarianization of wage labor leads to a
democratization of labor value. Skills, experience, labor productivity count for
greater labor value and are no longer class or caste tied, unless these coincide
with or happen to reinforce market opportunities. "…the market and its
processes 'knows no personal distinctions'. 'Functional' interests dominate it.
It knows nothing of 'honor'." (Max Weber)
I have arrived at a point of proffering a theory of
ethnization as a process of diagonal mobilization and stratification which tends
to cross cut both political vertical class boundaries and religious caste
boundaries. As such the process of ethnization is critically tied to the process
of economization or marketization or commodization that fuels modern economic
development. The link is clear--the ethnic communities are economic communities
that defines values as reward structures, reinforcement priorities or as
resource systems. The structure of ethnic patterning is a type of multiplex
networking. Ethnic communities define, in the Weberian model, opportunity
structures.
Lawrence Siaw relates Max Webers notion of stereotypes,
accumulated in linguistic and symbolic terms of direct social action, in
defining communalistic relations in relation to the ethnicity of the Chinese in
Malaysia. Meaningful interaction across group boundaries is hindered by the
cultural complexity and plurality of the context. "Such a situation tends
to strengthen in-group solidarity and heighten ethnic and racial stereotype
conceptions of other groups, thus causing the sanction of actions taken by the
dominant groups, depriving the weaker ones of access to economic and political
opportunities." (Lawrence Siaw: 395) Stereotypes can in time become firmly
entrenched and reinforced by the structural patterning of intergroup relations
that results from the implementation of such stereotypes themselves.
In socio-structural terms, there are religious, social,
psychological and cultural dimensions that have been excluded from this
political economic formula for ethnicity, which I believe to be in the final
analysis as necessary to the eidetic structure underlying a comprehensive theory
of social structure and cultural historical process. The roles of these
alternative dimensionalities are viral in a complete understanding which
provides formal/functional explanation of structural interrelationships between
people and their social groupings within a common environment. In this sense
functional does not refer to primarily to an on going organizational mechanisms
of synchronic, formally static or universal interrelationships, but refers to
the dynamic, processural interrelationships which create change or controls
change to effect continuity or consistency.
These multiple dimensions are merely multiple extremes of a
single complex continuum of cultural historical process. These extremes form
multiple even horizons which tend to limit or bound our understanding of human
reality. Structure as it is employed here refers only to the eidetic and
formulaic understanding of complex phenomenological processes. The complex of
interrelationships between these dimensions constitutes what I will call a
complex dialectic as opposed to a simple dialectic in the Hegelian sense. This
dialectic ranges between two sets of horizons, the psychological and the social,
the understanding of the individual process can be viewed as emic and that of
the group process of communicational exchange and interaction can be viewed as
'etic'--the former is thus endogenous part of the dialectic, the latter
exogenous.
Whereas the simple Hegelian dialectic that forms the basis of
logical discourse in unilinear and progressive of a thesis, antithesis and
synthesis which describes a deterministic order to an historical logica of
developmental change, the complex dialectic is modeled as a cyclical process
without an a priori set order or directionality of change. Its unfolding is not
unilinear but multi-linear and is not necessarily progressive in a decisive
replacement sense, but includes the opposite tendency for regression and the
process of simple growth, accumulation or enumeration of variations,
possibilities and differences. The entire system contracts and expands, with
each successive expansion subsuming the previous stages. Religious structure,
political structure and economic structure are viewed as the three vertices of
an equilateral triangle in which any or each of the vertices can become the
thesis, the opposite vertice the antithesis and the remaining alternative
vertice the synthesis.
Our discourse will take theoretically whichever form we
choose depending upon which dimensions we prefer as primary and which as
antithetical. We suffer in our theory construction always diminishing degrees of
freedom. The point of this model is the delineation of the complete and
sufficient range of possibilities of the development of social phenomena, as
opposed to theoretical, as opposed to the actual or probable directions in which
social phenomena historically unfold. If applied to class structure then it
opens up a more complex range of possibilities than Marxist interpretation. The
actual order or sequencing of events is itself not historically predetermined,
but the dialectical process itself is what is structural determinant--giving a
sense of fate to historical process. Depending upon which structural dimensions
are chosen as oppositional contrasts, the remaining dimensions will become
determined as the mediator between the analytically opposed dimensions. If we
choose the contrasts of political and economic, then we should expect religious
dimensions to effect an obviation of the structural conflict. In this sense the
religious dimensionally underlying ethnicity, which remains to be explored.
Ethnic or ethno is a particularistic substitute for the terms
of culture and/or civilization. As such these alternative metaphors are framing
metaphors which allow us to organize our comprehension of human reality. These
are the terms used to describe the whole dialectical structure, as it becomes
historically translated through time. They are stepping outside the etic/emic
dialectic to review the overall process as it unfolds through time. In this
sense we are being irretrievably holistic and synthetic. The important
theoretical question is this, can we ever step outside of the existential
horizon of human reality and then what do we have? In this theory, ethnic is
merely a way of talking about human reality, one that has become quite
fashionable with the rise of ethnic consciousness.
4. How does the structure of ethnicity in general come to
stand for some kind of underlying sub-structure? If we accept the thesis that,
as a substitute for culture and civilization, ethno or ethnic becomes a framing
metaphor for the theoretical organization of reality, then it is not difficult
to commit the leap of faith to say that ethno not only is a symbolic metaphor
that always stand for itself but is also simultaneously a metaphor which always
stands for many other things as well. It comes to subsume the entire complex of
dialectical interrelationships which it both summarizes and serves to
elaborate.
The notion of ethno is more serviceable that its parent
notion of culture which has that relativistic-deterministic connotation of the
culture garden or of the isolated island. An ethnic grouping may be an enclave,
but always in reference to some kind of larger framework. Perhaps ethno will
come to replace culture in our terminology, as culture has tended to replace the
less efficient notion of civilization, while all the concepts will retain more
precise, technical meanings. Ethnic as a notion must always stand for some kind
of substructure, as its inherent meaning is structural. To describe phenomena is
to perceive and conceive of these particular phenomena as somehow ethnical or
ethnically related but this begs the definition of ethnic as being anything
other than a framing metaphor. Delineation of the underlying substructure is not
the reifying of the reality which the models are supposed to depict. It suffices
as an adequate explanation of the phenomena, but not as a sufficient description
for that phenomena. The description of the reality which models seek to explain
is a problem of hermeneutical/historical narrative. It sets the language rules
of the game--the event horizons of our pre-understandings.
Upon the edge of the hermeneutical/historical circle, things
political, economic, religious, social and ethnic become inseparably inter-fused
and confused in the cultural historical delineation of developmental process of
change, of social group interests, tensions, conflicts, relations and structures
such that there can be little concise formal delineation of substantive
experiential phenomena. In other words, in the emerging process of living there
can be no precise, clear cut, categorical separations between things labeled
political, economic or ethnic. Such things become inextricably interrelated and
become in essence more a matter of definition of relationships between things
rather then any discrete, finite things in and for themselves.
In the general consideration of human reality and the science
which seeks to describe and explain this reality, the irreducible things that
are both the subject and object of our knowledge and understandings are
individual human beings within a spatial-temporal continuum, and the social
groupings into which they congregate, aggregate, coalesce and which become
perpetuated despite a continual turnover in individual identity and
personality.
The fundamental analytical dichotomization applied to these
two categories of things seen as discrete entities with a well defined,
corporeal outline and concrete content, is between external and internal
relationships. Relationships of similarity and difference within the inner
environment of the individual, between the identifiable sub-elements of the
persons, and with the external environment, and then internal relationships
within a group, and external relationships outside of the group, or between
groups and their environments. Our systematic understanding of these things
forms two separate horizons--two horizons at the individual level of personality
and at the interpersonal level of the group entity. Somehow these are polar
extremes of a single dialectical continuum, from a continuous ever expanding,
circular horizon, which becomes fused in the broad open in between spaces. In
our attempt to understand the dynamic process of interrelationships between
things, versus static descriptive differences, we seek causal deterministic
relations--i.e. directions and we distinguish between endogenous and exogenous
factors or sources of change.
Things political become translated into things economic and
ethnic, and vice versa. Power translates into money and money translates into
power. The analytical categories separating what is political, economic or
ethnic are more conceptual categories in our own minds, hypostatized upon things
with metaphorical meanings, and relationships between these things.
What I have been searching for in this paper has been the
elucidation of relations between things--i.e. people and social groupings, which
coherently and consistently, necessarily and sufficiently, parsimoniously and
empirically, tie together the understandings of 'things and relations' which are
political, economic and ethnic by name. These are labels describing
interrelationships between people as defined by their interactions, by
similarities and differences, by changes and by continuities.
It is now time to return to our original question, and ask
once again, 'What is the political economy of Nanyang ethnicity?'
******
"…to classify a Chinese association according to its
name is always misleading." (T'ien; 1953: 19)
"In Burma as in Java, probably the first thing that
strikes the visitor is the medley of peoples--Europeans, Chinese, Indians and
native. It is in the strictest sense a medley for they mix but do not combine.
Each group holds by its own religion, its own culture and language, its own
ideas and ways. As individuals they meet, but only in the marketplace in buying
and selling. There is a plural society with different sections of the community
living side by side, but separate within the same political unit. Even in the
economic sphere there is a division of labor along racial lines. Natives,
Chinese, Indians and Europeans all have different functions and within each
major group subsections have particular occupations…The plural society has a
great variety of forms, but in some form or other, it is the distinctive
characteristic of the tropical economy." (J.S. Furnival; 1956: 304)
Many situations in which the Nanyang Chinese find themselves
have been referred to as complex--complex pluralism of societies characteristic
of the post colonial Southeast Asian geo-political environment. Such societies
have been referred to as multi-cultural, radically plural, consociational or
communalistic, poly-ethnic.
J. S. Furnival first introduced the conception of the plural
society that is so characteristic of Southeast Asia, 'a society that is,
comprising two or more elements or social orders which live side by side, yet
without mingling, in one political unit.'
"The ethnically homogenous Chinese middleman group
(EHMG) is ubiquitous to the dual economies of Southeast Asia. The very ubiquity
of Chinese middleman in Southeast Asia prompted J. S. Furnival to coin the term
'plural society' to describe the pattern of specialization and division of labor
along ethnic lines." (Janet T. Landa; 1983: 86)
The notion focuses directly upon ethnic differentiation
within a colonial framework entailing economic and political dimensions of the
social order. The basic features of such pluralism are ethnic group boundaries
including separate communities, ethnic differentiation of economic functions,
roles, status and class, low rate of intermarriage and uneven distribution of
wealth, power and opportunity, within a politically unified community framework.
Rulers and ruled are ethnically distinct and there is an absence of national
consensus--i.e. common cultural and political values. Economic competition and
political conflict becomes cast in ethnic terms.
The marketplace is an urban setting becomes the only common
meeting ground for the different communities--an interethnic 'no man's land' in
which political economic strategies become played out. These plural societies
came into being in a colonial political economic context and require colonial
style domination in order to maintain social stability, as they are inherently
prone to divisive political economic conflict. Such societies arose with the
need to articulate between the local peripheries and the international core, by
the strategic political economic inter-positioning of a third, in-between party
which seemingly lacked vested interests beyond economic and political survival.
According to Furnival, ethnic groups within plural societies can meet safely
only in the marketplace within an urban commercial center. Conflict can only be
avoided by maintaining colonial hegemony and a laissez faire exchange market
economy.
Plural societies become complicated by the coexistence of
over lapping and competing multiple political economic hierarchies of social
stratification which tend to become skewed. In such multiple hierarchies,
stratification is termed multi-dimensional and there occurs
inconsistencies in the over lapping areas such that "individuals may occupy
different positions in the several hierarchies." (Blumberg; 1972: 22) In
such societies ethnic status role becomes largely a matter of positioning
between different hierarchies, which because of a relative inbetweeness becomes
characterized by a kind of status inconsistency seen as a form of marginality
that may breed discontent and resentment. (Blumberg; 1972: 22)
"Status are the cognitive, formal, ideal aspect of
status role complexes: roles are the behavioral correlates of statuses. Statuses
are designated by identities or identifying labels." (D. E. Brown; Principles
of Social Structure: Southeast Asia: 17-18)
The political legal order determines in the strict sense the
legal status of the individual. In many countries, the legal citizenship status
of the ethnic Chinese minorities is unconstitutionally provisional. In all legal
orders, the legal structure directly influences or orients the distribution of
power 'economic or otherwise, within its community' in which power is defined in
a competitive setting. According to Max Weber--
"The social order and the economic order are, of course,
similarly related to the 'legal order'. However the social and the economic
order are not identical." (Max Weber; 1946)
While the Nanyang Chinese have been consistently economically
more powerful and privileged, in most Southeast Asian countries they remained
politically subordinate. Such conditions tend to break down into a complex
situation of radical pluralism in which social stability is reinforced
politically from above, even though economically it remains divided. Truly
equal, consociational ethnic groups within a democratic social political milieu
are viewed as politically unstable entities, unless several conditional factors
are present which would stabilize--primarily either environmental ecological
surplus and stability, or else the presence of an outside external threat
demanding the mutual cooperation of all groups. In the absence of such external
conditions to reinforce internal stability, which tend to be ephemeral anyway,
such relatively equal consociational groupings, while ideologically desirable,
tend to fracture and break down under the stress of limited resources and
political economic competition between ethnic groups. One group will tend to
achieve political predominance and thus foster social relations conducive to its
groups economic success. In most Southeast Asia countries, while the ethnic
Chinese were frequently economically more powerful, they remained politically
subordinate. Such conditions tend to break down into a complex situation of
'radical pluralism' in which social stability is reinforced politically 'by
probability that an order will be upheld by a specific staff of men who will use
physical or psychical compulsion with the intention of obtaining conformity with
the order, or of inflicting sanctions for infringement of it.' In such a system
we have the emergence of a colonial ethnarchy.
According to Weber, a class consists of a grouping of people
sharing in common a "specific causal component of their life chances, in so
far as (2) this component is represented exclusively by economic interests in
the possession of goods and opportunities for income and (3) is represented
under the conditions of the community or labor markets." Accordingly, then,
class is clearly tied to economic relationships, particularly the state of
property ownership or of relative propertylessness. Class situation is in this
sense ultimately a kind of "market situation; in the sense of the kinds of
chances in the market " is the decisive moment that presents a
common condition for the individual's fate." Weber distinguishes the class
situation from the status group:
"In contrast to classes, status groups are
normally communities. They are, however, often of an amorphous kind. In
contrast, to the purely economically determined 'class situation' we wish to
designate as 'status situation' every typical component of the life fate of men
that is determined by a specific, positive or negative, social estimation of honor."
(Max Weber; 1946)
Weber also contends that that lifestyle differences that
relate to the question of what is proper and honorable are often used to
differentiate status communities whose members share every typical component of
the life determined by a specific positive or negative estimation of social
honor. Status communities constitute one of Webers three dimensions of social
order, which can be either acriptive or aquisitive.
"In other words, social prestige can be claimed by
virtue of birth or by the appropriation of political and hieratic powers. Like
ethnic communities, status communities can also monopolize economic or
occupational advantages. Implicit in this analogy is the close relationship
between social status and ethnicity. Hence ethnic differentiation can be
paralleled with social gradation." (Lawrence Siaw: 395)
Weber links status honor to a particular 'style of life'
shared by the members, the expectation of which is linked to restrictions on
social intercourse. Such closure is based upon usurpation of status honor
leading to social stratification. The most extremes form of this restriction and
usurpation of status honor becomes a form of caste endogamy. The road from
conventional to legal privilege is easily traveled once the social stratum
become stable and become linked to the distribution of economic power. Status
honor is linked to his notion of ethnic honor that he assumes is characteristic
of all ethnic communities and defines as "belief in the superiority of
one's own customs and the inferiority of those of others," or as
ethnocentrism. It is "accessible to all those who belong to the
subjectively believed community of descent." Unlike status honor, it is not
as restrictive in its qualifying characteristics.
According to Weber, status structure reaches extreme forms in
structural contexts where differences are presumed to be ethnic. Caste is the
normal form in which ethnic communities coexist in a "societalized"
manner. Social intercourse and intermarriage is prohibited, and principles of
lineage or clan are exaggerated. Caste is common to "pariah" peoples
all over theworld
"These people form communities, acquire specific
occupational traditions of handicrafts or of other arts, and cultivate a belief
in their ethnic community. They live in a 'Diaspora' strictly segregated from
all personal intercourse, except that of an unavoidable sort, and their
situation is legally precarious. Yet, by virtue of their economic
indispensability, they are tolerated, indeed, frequently privileged, and they
live in interspersed political communities. The Jews are the most impressive
historical example."
A 'status' segregation grown into a 'caste' differs in its
structure from a mere 'ethnic' segregation: the caste structure transforms the
horizontal and unconnected coexistences ethnically segregated groups into a
vertical social system of super and subordination. Correctly formulated: a
comprehensive societalization integrates the ethnically divided communities into
specific political and communal action. In their consequences they differ
precisely in this way: ethnic coexistences condition a mutual repulsion and
disdain but allow each ethnic community to consider its own honor as the highest
one; the caste structure brings about a social subordination and an
acknowledgment of 'more honor' in favor of the privileged caste and status
groups. This is due to the fact that in the caste structure ethnic distributions
as such have become 'functional' distinctions within the political
societalization (warriors, priests, artisans that are politically important for
war and for building, and so on). But even pariah people who are most despised
are usually apt to continue cultivation in some manner that which is equally
particular to ethnic and to status communities; the belief in their own specific
'honor'. This is the case with the Jews. (Max Weber)
This brings us to reconsider the notion of the ethnic
boundary and to its artificial contrivance in order to maintain social
separation and colonial distance. Such boundaries arise as the result of
political economic competition for control over limited resources. Cultural
assimilation and integration tend to break down ethnic boundaries, just as
inter-caste exogamy tends to undermine any horizontal stratification. It is
interesting that before the post colonial era ethnic assimilation of the
overseas Chinese proceeded upon a normal rate in many Southeast Asian settings,
but now this natural process has been stemmed and in many cases even reversed.
Assimilation rates between ethnic groups, between the Nanyang Chinese and their
host societies have been found to vary alongside of rates of vertical social
mobility. "Ethnic diversity varies with the hereditary closure on ranking
systems". (D. E. Brown; 1976: 95) "Closed hierarchies beget ethnic
differentiation…the observe of this proposition is that vertical mobility
reduces ethnic differentiation." In the case of the Nanyang Chinese as a
conspicuous minority in their host societies, ethnic boundaries have been
contrived in the purported cause of insuring the political stability and
economic mobility and exploitability within a radically plural society.
"Societies with open hierarchies have tremendous powers
of assimilation--witness China... In an open hierarchy, with readily perceptible
vertical mobility, an explanation of high low cultural differences in ethnic
terms would be absurd. But in a closed system, where the high and low are
biologically 'closed' groups, a claim of their ethnic distinctiveness could be
entertained." (D. E. Brown; Principles of Social Structure: Southeast
Asia: 95)
The marketplace becomes the center of exchange between ethnic
groups. If it is the only place in which exchange relations between such groups
is affected then the two communities are more or less otherwise segregated. The
transaction hypothesis states that the higher rates of interaction among persons
of different backgrounds, the greater their degree of integration. "Put
more simply, people who deal with one another tend to like each other more than
those who keep entirely to themselves…" (Rabushka; 1973: 124) We would
thus expect a kind of marketization tendency for inter-ethnic relations to
become defined and expressed in terms of marketplace transactions. Market
exchange is voluntary and mutualistic, involving therefore some measure of
reciprocity, or give and take, between buyer and seller. In such contexts,
racial tensions and conflicts must be minimized. Individuals as members of
particular groups may gain or loss on the basis of their marginal productivity
and groups having low marginal values of productivity may attempt to seize
political control over resources to compensate for the inequality of marketplace
interactions.
"The public activities of the government in the
multiracial environment thus convert private economic conflict among individuals
in markets into group conflict between races. When the economic well being of
groups is significantly affected by political activity, politics becomes a fight
between groups (or races) for survival. Thus, in a society in which race is
politically crucial, the greater the public use of resources, i.e. the greater
likelihood of racial conflict. Politics therefore entails neither unanimity or
voluntaries…In short, while racial harmony can exist in the market place,
politics set race against race in the struggle that is very often to the
death." (Rabushka; 1973: 100-101)
The primate city is the urban marketplace of the world
economy that provides the common post-colonial setting for the playing out of
the political economy of ethnicity in plural society. It is the meeting ground
where political conflict and economic competition between the ethnically
distinctive groups takes center stage.
"Some countries posses a very large city which exercise
a dominant influence on national life; not only does it contain a very large
proportion of the total urban population, but it virtually monopolizes
non-agricultural activities and plays a major role in the national
culture." (Donald W. Fryer; Emerging Southeast Asia: A Study in Growth
and Stagnation: 84)
It is in such urban areas, core regions of the periphery,
that ethnic relations are played out most fully. It is the marketplace of such
centers where political economic tensions and conflict are most in evidence.
Unequal or uneven exchange of scarce, or highly values, or
human resources associated with the market network, or the exploitative
appropriation of such resources, can become the source of exchange generated
conflict in which normal exchange mechanisms serve as a mode of negative
solidarity in the Durkheimian or Maussian sense. Conflict may include contests,
competitions, disputes and tensions as well as socially expressed aggression.
Intensity and destructive consequences of such exchange generated conflict
become the relevant considerations. Relationships between trading parties
depends upon the trade itself, which comes to constitute one of the most
important modes of inter-group relations. "In more complex societies,
trading specialists emerge who, along with political authorities and property
owners, become major foci of conflict relations. By focusing conflict upon
themselves, the compensating effects of other, cross cutting conflicts, are
diffused and their relative forces diminished" (B. L. Foster; 1978: 10)
Exchange generated conflict relationships within a stratified community can be
regulated by ritual or jural proscription, by limiting the range of interaction
possible, by "putting distance between the parties--whether such distance
is spatial or social" and by displacement of conflict upon a third in
between party which is not the direct cause of the conflict.
"In addition, trade in peasant societies is often
characterized by a special form of social distance: it is often largely in the
hands of ethnic minorities. Ethnic differences have many of the same, although
weaker, properties of spatial distance. Interaction usually occurs in only
limited spheres of social life--notably economic. (The classic definition of
plural societies embodied the idea that the segments came together only in the
marketplace.) Marriage and therefore kinship relations are usually limited (as
are friendships, common religious activities and recreational activities) and
trading relations are thus socially separated from other spheres of day to day
life.
The social distance has two contradictory effects. On the one
hand, as we have seen, by socially separating the traders it focuses the
conflict on them and diminishes the possibilities of its being offset by cross
cutting conflicts. On the other hand, it insulates most community social
relations from an important source of conflict and ,as with the spatial
separation brought about by markets, helps relieve the trader from the
expectations of fair dealing and generosity which the peasants have among
themselves. This change of expectations, as does the marketplace, constitutes a
mechanism for displacement of the exchange generated conflict by focusing some
of the tension on inter-ethnic group relations rather than on the remarkable
hostility often encountered by minority trading groups. It also helps explain
why traders who are the object of such hostility are not readily replaced by
traders from the majority groups: the latter are destroyed by the conflict
inherent in their commercial activities or by the uneconomic behavior required
of them if they are to avoid conflict." (Foster; 1978: 14)
Fostering and maintaining ethnic group boundaries and
identity between groups within a plural colonial setting can be not just a
source of potential conflict and tension, but in serving as a kind of social
distancing mechanism mediated via the ritually sanctioned structure of the
market exchange relations, can be a method of assuaging and alleviating
potential threatening conflict. The existence of a convenient out group can
appropriately allay tensions which might otherwise break down a class hierarchy
and threaten to destroy the traditional integrity. Shifting class tensions
derived from purely economic orientations upon a neighboring status grouping not
directly involved in the dame class structure becomes an effective means of
displacing potential conflict and disorder. In this sense ethnic tensions may be
seen to have a positive as well as a primarily negative influence in maintaining
the status quo of social and communal solidarity in a complex political economic
arena.
"…we might also consider whether simply being
different from the Filipino majority, simply being distinguishable as an ethnic
group, also facilitates commerce.
I perceive the usefulness of these ethnic differences to be
as follows:
1. A shift of to commercial transactions across ethnic
lines increases the chance of decision making by both parties on more purely
economic, goal oriented and impersonal bases…
2. In transactions across ethnic lines, there is the
mutual expectations of negative reciprocity…
3. In commercial transactions across ethnic lines, each
party exploits certain aspects of the stereotypes which the other holds for
him. In fact one might find that each group purposely developed their ethnic
personae for complementary business dealings…
4. An ethnic difference between parties in a commercial
transaction may facilitate trade by 'differentiation the reward structures'
of each side so that they are complementary rather than identical…
5. …a series of phenomena may be applied to reduce
tensions inherent in face to face commercial deals…'ad hoc' categorization
by occupational requirements…adherence to 'fixed price' transactions…"
(Omohundro; 1977: 130-133)
"Breakdown of the minority trading mechanisms provide
large scale, inter-group conflict which, in extreme cases can take the form of
genocide. Persecution of minorities who are active in commerce has been known
for centuries in the western world and has become an important fact in the Third
World today. Trading minorities are especially vulnerable to the machinations of
politicians who wish to invent enemies for purposes of mobilizing political
support. Even weakening or withdrawal of protection by the police power of the
state may be sufficient to precipitate widespread violence against minority
traders. Destruction or expulsion of the trading minority may lead to severe
economic dislocation and to long term social change, but the society is less
vulnerable than simpler tribal societies." (B. L. Foster: 22)
The other complementary side of the coin of economic
marketization of inter-group relations and ethnic boundaries is the political
bureaucratic 'encapsulation' of majority-minority relations and ethnic
'enclaves' within a host society. This encapsulation is multi-tiered within a
larger colonial political economic framework. Encapsulation by divisively
national interests and global market political economies tied to Nanyang
economic empire to a set of cross cutting chains of political authority and
dependency. The Nanyang was never really and independent state in terms of
territorial sovereignty or political economic autonomy. It was always
semi-peripheral whose marginal 'intermediate' status was determined instead by
situational geo-political contexts and circumstances and by its adaptability to
changes in such circumstances. Encapsulation brings into play the notion of
political economic integration of ethnically diverse stratum within a unified
geo-political sphere of influence and the related notion of culture brokerage in
articulation between local and higher level systems, mediating the boundaries of
ethnic encapsulation within stratified societies. Within the bureaucratic
structure of the encapsulation of the periphery by the core via the
semi-periphery, there prevails a bureaucratic tendency to minimize local
interaction within a larger field of action and to pass the buck up the chain of
command, as well as the delegation of negative authority. "Thus, a tendency
toward 'encapsulation proper' persists, as Chinese political leaders at all
levels serve as specialized middleman linking their fellow Chinese further down
the scale into Malay dominated political system. Rather than integration per se,
an attenuated encapsulation prevails." (Strauch; 1981: 12)
"In this setting, linkages, alliances and coalitions at
all levels of society combine what appears on the surface to be situational
flexibility and fluidity with a certain degree of underlying rigidity based on
the givens of ethnicity and power. Center periphery relations ideally
incorporate not only elements of dominance, demanding compliance and submission,
but also elements of solidarity, promising consonance and unity of interests as
a basis for legitimacy and trust. Such solidarity must be found in common
ethnicity or level of power, however. The Malay dominated center shares bonds of
interest with the Chinese elites who share some power at the center, but in
relation to the Chinese periphery an operational commonality is lacking. The
Malay center dominates the Chinese periphery, but it is able to offer little
direct inducement to or reassurance of solidarity; instead it seeks merely to
minimize alienation and fall back of acceptable neutrality. It is left to the
subordinate Chinese elements from the center, from its ambiguous position of
uncertain proximity to real power, to act as mediator and convey and aura of
solidarity and inclusion embracing the Chinese periphery. It is a task that is
not always accomplished." (Strauch; 1981: 13)
The overseas Chinese of the Nanyang have been noted for their
overall failure to achieve the prerequisite 'community closure' construed as
necessary for their ethnic political economic mobilization. They are involved in
particularistic and cross cutting organizations which inhibit the development of
'pan Chinese' solidarity. Their 'nationalistic' movements, however apparently
threatening from the outside were always limited and divided from the inside,
never 'whole hearted'. The Chinese have been typically unable to assert
authoritatively their 'ethnic honor'. "Instead history has shown that the
Chinese…have had great difficulty in uniting as an ethnic entity against
non-Chinese threats." (Siaw:397) Lacking the necessary community
solidarity, they are, as a whole, typically unable to mobilize for action.
"When communal actions of an economic or political nature occurred, they
have been supported by certain sub-groups, but have not involved the ethnic
Chinese community at large. To the degree that the overseas Chinese are unable
to engage in concerted actions on a community wide basis, they do not constitute
and ethnic community in the Weberian sense." (Siaw: 398)
"…As for the immigrant communities, mainly the Chinese
and the Indians, most of the legitimate avenues towards economic and political
power in the wider society were still generally closed to them before and after
Independence. Hence, in order to survive and to survive well, these immigrant
communities must resort to illegal or illegitimate activities to satisfy their
basic social and psychological needs for reward and recognition even among
themselves." (Siaw: 397)
As a result, the overseas Chinese in general seem rather to
have resigned themselves to their ethnic membership as defined by others and
their inevitability of their ethnic label and its consequences. Too little
attention has been given to the organizational/administrative side to the
structure of colonial political economy, which from a bureaucratic standpoint
always seems over weaning in its fundamental functions of conflict control,
tension mediation and resource extraction and policy implementation. Ethnic
brokerage within an encapsulated state economy by 'towkay entrepreneurs'
represents a form of 'bureaucratic co-option' which serves to reinforce
differences and ethnic boundaries while simultaneously distancing the minority
underclass from their own ethnic leadership. In complex systems such as colonial
political economies, potentially subversive elements are much more dangerous if
left outside of the systems functioning than if it is marginally incorporated
into the system, 'bought off' by enforcing functional interdependency upon the
system--it is a way of 'stabilizing radical' elements.
The Nanyang state was one composed of semi-peripheral
structural interrelations articulating between core and periphery of a global,
inter-regional, national and local political economies. It was a state created
and reinforced from without more than or as much as from within. Its position
and function was intermediary between conflicting interest groups made up mostly
of sojourning middleman and immigrant laborers, petty traders and usurers, and
merchant entrepreneurs who in a sense were not only overseas immigrants from
China but also represented a form of rural to urban, peasant to city person,
periphery to core transmigration. Within a colonial political economic
framework, a comprador intermediary class arose which affected the articulation
of the 'dual economy' at all levels--a class of merchant minority middleman who
stood with a monopolistic footing in both domestic and international economies.
Primate cities and urbanized colonial towns became the island havens for this
perennially insecure grouping of humanity. Concurrent with this kind of
geographic and social mobility is a characteristic shift of cultural and
characteriological orientation from traditionalistic, paternalistic,
familialistic, particularistic, personalistic, hierarchialistic political values
within a rural peasant moral economy to a more capitalistically oriented,
competitive, universalistic economic orientation within a mostly urban economic
market setting and political administrative framework. As permanent 'sojourners'
they became affixed mostly somewhere 'betwixt and between' within the no man's
land of the semi-peripheral middle ground of the rural urban continuum. Their
common political economic interposition remains ambiguous and ambivalent,
precariously tied to both a rural economic substructure and an urban political
superstructure and the inherent ambivalence and ambiguity of their paternalistic
competitive political economic orientation reflects this intermediate
positioning between strongly polarized levels.
"Seen from the statistics, the 'average' Chinese in
Southeast Asia ranked between European and native in per capita wealth, level of
education and other indicators of social and economic status. In another sense,
too, the Chinese were a middle group, because of their special position in
retail trade: they were intermediaries between the native producer/consumer and
the European dominated import-export trade or the world's markets.
However, the foregoing discussion of the kinds of economic
activity engaged in by Nanyang Chinese should have made clear that the Chinese
minorities in Southeast Asia were too vast and differentiated a group to ever
have fitted neatly into a single class segment of the plural society's pyramid.
Individual Chinese could be poorer than most natives and richer than most
Europeans; the larger the Chinese minority, the more differentiated, and the
more potential for internal competition and conflict it might harbor."
(Somers-Heidhues; 1974: 18)
******
"Hence, it seems that the nature of the Malaysian
community, as in other overseas immigrant communities, was inherently divisive.
This characteristic is due to the extrinsic factor of the British created
Malayan social structure which encourages social class and status along ethnic
or racial lines within a framework which sustains the whole. The divisive
characteristic of Malaysian Chinese society, as of other overseas Chinese
communities, is also due to the inadequate sense of ethnic honor among the
members of each of the overseas Chinese communities. The general conception that
overseas Chinese have always displayed their 'Chineseness' by their persistence
in the 'Chinese way of life' is in fact a misconception and a misunderstanding
of what is universally Chinese and what is uniquely and exclusively provincial
and native from particular places in China. Immigrant overseas Chinese displayed
not so much the universally acknowledged learning, and speaking a common
language, the Kuan-hua, as their own variety of social, cultural, religious and
linguistic traditions which only members of their own group could understand and
appreciate fully. Being almost entirely unschooled in the universal way of life
based on the Confucian model, the immigrant overseas Chinese could not share a
common ethnic identity within their heterogeneous social setting.
Indeed, the more they try to express their 'Chineseness' the
more divisive they became." (Lawrence K. L. Siaw; The Legacy of
Malaysian Chinese Social Structure: 402)
To the outside observer looking in, the Nanyang Chinese seem
to present a common united front, a solidary face of stereotypical similarity.
But one must wonder whether or not this is not really a commonly held stereotype
which is reinforced from the outside. This solidary exterior persists inspite of
the fact that 'studies on the overseas Chinese to date have revealed a
consistent theme about the nature of each of these communities: their
heterogeneous composition, their complexity and their divisiveness.' Indeed,
quite similar to the WASP stereotype of the capitalist from the west, we have a
characteristic E.H.M.G. stereotype of the ubiquitous 'ethnically homogenous
Chinese middleman group. Indeed, the 'sojourners' and 'comprador' label have
been ubiquitously applied by western scholars attempted to understand and
explain this curious sub-grouping of humanity.
"The stereotype conception about the Chinese that they
were extremely family and home centered, and that they would eventually return
to their home country led the administrators and the host communities to treat
the overseas Chinese as sojourners. This resulted in their exclusion from
participation in the activities of the wider community. The overseas Chinese, on
the other hand, generally played the same game with their administrators and
their host neighbors. Acting on the expectations of others, the overseas Chinese
could excuse themselves from responsibilities in the development of their host
societies. They could thus devote their energies to making more money to support
themselves and their families in China. This self imposed alienation is the
second common factor which caused anti-Chinese feelings." (Siaw: 400)
These stereotypes have indeed been fostered from within by
particular interest groups among the Chinese community itself. Not all of the
Chinese bourgeois are 'comprador' or sojourners--many are considered part of
national domestic economy which does not necessarily look to a larger global
market. Not all the Chinese are 'petty merchant' traders or shopkeepers--the
more accurate stereotypes are one of 'Jack of all trades, but master of only
one--that is making money'. 'Ching-Chong Chinaman, sitting on a fence, trying to
make a dollar out of fifteen cents!' Indeed--
"The Chinese are everything; they are actors, acrobats,
artists, musicians, chemists and druggists, clerks, cashiers, engineers,
architects, surveyors, missionaries, priests, doctors, schoolmasters, lodging
housekeepers, butchers, pork sellers, cultivators of pepper and gambier, cake
sellers, cart and hackney carriage owners, cloth hawkers, distillers of spirits,
eating house keepers, fishmongers, fruit sellers, ferrymen, grass sellers,
hawkers, merchant and agents, oil sellers, opium shopkeepers, pawnbrokers, pig
dealers and poulterers. They are rice dealers, ship chandlers, shopkeepers,
general dealers, spirit shop keepers, servants, timber dealers, tobacconists,
vegetable sellers, planters, market gardeners, laborers, bakers, millers,
barbers, blacksmiths, boatmen, book-binders, boot and shoe makers, brick makers,
carpenters, cabinet makers, carriage builders,, cartwrights, cart and hackney
carriage drivers, charcoal burners and sellers, coffin makers, confectioners,
contractors and builders, coopers, engine drivers and firemen, fishermen,
goldsmiths, gunsmiths and locksmiths, lime burners, masons and bricklayers, mat,
kajang and basket makers, oil manufacturers and miners. To which we add
painters, paper lantern makers, porters, pea grinders, printers, sago, sugar and
gambier manufacturers, sawyers, seamen, ship and boat builders, soap boilers,
stone cutters, sugar boilers, tailors, tanners, tinsmiths and braziers, umbrella
makers, undertakers and tomb builders, watchmakers, water carriers, woodcutters
and sellers, wood and ivory carvers, fortune tellers, grocers, idol vagabonds or
samsengs and thieves." (Vaughn; 1879, 1971: 15)
How can one manage to distill simple minded labels like
'comprador' or 'sojourner' out of all this diversity is simply beyond
belief--indeed, from the insider's point of view, the 'emic' approach, any such
facile labels are bound to appear superficial, hiding more then they reveal.
Indeed, diversity has long been the hallmark of the internal structure of emic
'Chineseness' which is widely acknowledged by most scholars.
"Chinese ethnic 'identity' in Southeast Asia has been
characterized by great variety, originally based on the South Chinese dialects
which differentiated groups within the Chinese community. This basic linguistic
differentiation was enhanced by differences in occupation, class, nation of
residence and various other factors. Another element of diversity within the
Chinese community was added by the varying degrees of acculturation and
accommodation of the Chinese to indigenous cultures, culminating in some cases
in complete assimilation, but more often marked by the creation of new groups of
acculturated Chinese. Some acculturated Chinese developed a coherent 'new'
identity, such as the Baba in Malaysia, while others in scattered communities
were marked by less well defined intermediate acculturated identities." (L.
A. Peter Gosling; The Chinese in Southeast Asia, Volume 11, 1983: 2)
"Thus, Chinese carry with them everywhere a remarkably
complex set of social identities, which the individual cannot discard without
ceasing to be Chinese. They cannot discard them and only within very narrow
limits may they alter them. As a further consequence of these facts, a Chinese
is a member of a series of nesting and cross cutting corporate forms wherever he
goes. The intersection of local identities in the homeland (province, district,
village) partially overlapping with linguistic affiliations, cross cutting
surname identities, superimposed on the local designations in the host country
(e.g. state, district, village) give rise to a series of categorical identities,
any of which or all of which may be fully incorporated…the possibilities are
enormous. Given the ascriptiveness of the categories they are ever present
(Crissman; 1967). The Chinese have ancient patterns of organization suitable to
these frames. But more than rank is not ascribed. Among the Chinese the
ideology of mobility, upward and downward, is great; so is the empirical
occurrence of such movement (Ho; 1964). The combination of ever ready
organizational receptacles and high aspirations for upward movement (not to
mention other factors in favor of the Chinese in Southeast Asia) make them
sociologically formidable. Their success in turning these social structural
advantages into economic affluence is too well known to require comment."
(Brown; 1976: 96-97)
Indeed one of the 'sociologically formidable' strengths
behind 'Shininess' is their sheer numbers--they come by the thousands. And for
every successful Chinaman or woman noticed, there have probably been many other
failures who have slipped through the historical record quite unnoticed. To
neglect this is to neglect the truth behind the mythology of 'Shininess'. We are
left then to reconsider the stereotype of Chinese from an insider's standpoint,
or 'emic' perspective and to evaluate the 'endogenous' structure lying behind
the baseline stereotype of Nanyang Shininess, for structure, system, pattern,
order, is maintained and upheld as much from within as it is reinforced or held
up from without. If the key characteristic of Nanyang Shininess is their
inherent complexity of social organization, diversity and divisiveness, then we
are faced with a paradox of finding a common theme of unity within diversity, a
common root of 'Shininess' amongst all the many noticeable differences. Unity in
diversity has been the overarching historical theme of 'cross roads Southeast
Asia' and no less for the Nanyang. 'To recapitulate, ethnic diversity is so
fundamental in Southeast Asia that it is one of the great laboratories for the
study of ethnicity.' Seen from the inside, the so called 'circumstantialist'
perspective of the political economy of ethnicity, which sees competition for
limited resources underlying and motivating the ethnic struggle, gives way to a
'cultural' or 'primordialist' orientation stressing commonality of values,
heritage and tradition which 'structure from within' the ethnic experience.
If the ethnic Chinese are characteristically different from
within, they are also characteristically different from without. These two sets
of differences, comparison from outside or inside, tend to become confused and
obfuscate the realities behind both. Back to the same astute author who
recognized all of the occupational differences among 'Chinaman' so long ago, we
have the following set of 'different' characteristics, as seen from without--
"The Chinese are sober, industrious, domesticated,
methodical, ingenious, honest and persevering in business, respectful to their
seniors and dutiful to their parents, polite in their intercourse with each
other, law loving, easily governed with firmness; on the other hand they are
crafty, proud, conceited, treacherous, unscrupulous, revengeful, cowardly, cruel
and untruthful. Superstitious to a degree. Their features are stolid and never
indicate the working of their minds. The Chinese, Sir John Davis says resemble
ants, by the manner in which they conquer difficulties by dint of mere numbers;
and they resemble those minute animals no less in their persevering and
unconquerable industry. Many Chinese customs are just the reverse of ours. We
mourn in black, they in white; we propel a boat with our backs to the bow, they
with their faces to the front; we make the north point of the compass the chief
point, they the south point; we take off our hats and shoes as a token of
respect, they keep them on for the same purpose; we fan our faces to cool
ourselves, they fan the antipodes to produce the same effect; in our names the
surname is placed last, in theirs they place the surname first; their place of
honor at table is on the left side, ours is on the right; they mount their
horses on the right side, we on the left; in speaking of dates they mention the
year first, then the month and lastly the day of the month; we give the date
first then the month and lastly the year; their women wear no petticoats and men
no shirts. Mr. Wingrove Cook thus amusingly writes with reference to China, and
the everyday customs of the Chinese. 'Where the roses have no fragrance and the
women no petticoats; where the laborer has no Sabbath and the magistrate no
sense of honor; where the needle points to the south and the sign being puzzled
is to scratch the antipodes of the head; where the place of honor is on the left
hand and the seat of intellect is in the stomach; when to take off your hat is
an insolent gesture and to wear white garments is to put yourself into
mourning.'" (J. D. Vaughn; 1879, 1971: 43-44)
To 'emphasize' difference is to neglect to see similarities
and to conflate mere 'coincidentals' in a trivial sense with more important
reasons. The Nanyang coin of 'Shininess' is indeed Janus-faced--it has two sides
as with all ethnic badges of honor, but to emphasize the contrasts is to forget
to see the coin as a whole and its purposes as a material symbol. Scratch its
surface, bit off its edge, and there is just beneath a common element of
humanity in its own proportions.
Promoting ethnicity is the manner in which one status
grouping achieves political economic mobilization and consolidation at the
behest and expense of another 'counter reference' status grouping. Ethnicity is
a two faced coin, or coinage system, which is the medium of transaction,
negotiation and exchange between different peoples who come together in the
competitive marketplace to do business and succeed in getting ahead. There is an
emic side to the structure of political economy as well as an etic, exogenous
side. There can be no politicality without economics and vice versa. To consider
economics as independent or outside the domain of power is to neglect its
ultimate function of facilitating the realization of power. To neglect the
economic underbelly of the potential monster is to deny the motivations and
source of energies and interests behind power--the monster must eat to survive.
To claim that ethnicity is both political and economic, as well as a few other
unconsidered socio-structural dimensions, and that this political economic
'substructure' has both etic, exogenous and complementary emic, endogenous forms
or patterns, is not to deny the phenomenological experience of ethnicity in and
of itself as a 'genuine' cultural reality. Ethnicity has its own cunning of
reason which cannot be accounted for by the reasons of its sub-structural
dimensionally--it is 'organismic' and synergistic, but it is not thereby organic
and super organic. In as much as present day political economy is referred to as
being determined within a post colonial mentality, but this does not exhaust or
sufficiently explain its existential reality--it has a raison d'être rooted in
a common ground of human identity, or the common identity of 'humanness' in a
shared human identity which goes beyond and comprehends, but is not comprehended
completely by political economic, post colonial way of life or 'lifestyle' or
'status honor'.
It is interesting to reconsider now the other side of the
coin of ethnic group identity and to talk of the emic, intrinsic and internal
structure as opposed to the external, extrinsic and largely etic structure of
inter-group exchange relations and conflict. Group boundaries are policed from
within as much as delimited from without. In this regard it is pertinent to
reconsider and recognize the paramount importance of the phenomena of ethnic
consciousness, not just as a conceptuality or mentality or symbol system,
but as a consistent, internally coherent, behavioral ethos which dictates a
common 'way' or style of life, and which results in the formation of particular
kinds of 'authoritarian power structures' and 'achievement orientations' which
tie together into a web or network patterning of political economic social
structure. Such a structure in turn fosters a kind of consciousness, an
awareness of status ascribed as 'Chineseness' and so the system seen internally
is complete and cybernetic--schismogenic or synergistic. It relates as an
historical-cultural process to a conscientious process of ethnic group boundary
identification and affiliation. Symbolic markers direct patterns of mobility,
thresholds for passing, gates for closing, means for mediating conflict and
creation. This process is referred to as 'ethnicization' of issues, whether
political or economic or other, a part of this process involves a politicization
of ethnic issues and an economization of ethnic resources--"Ethnic groups
maintain their boundaries in part by supporting a certain set of values, or
reward structures, that individuals can use for self ascription and self
evaluation. In the language of the social psychology of bargaining, (ethnic
groups) may differ enough in their payoff matrices by virtue of membership in
different ethnic groups that trade can be rewarding for both. These payoff
matrices are composed of as many motivational factors as the researcher wishes
to insert…" (Omohundro; 1977: 132) In other words, 'ethnicization' or the
'development of ethnic consciousness' represents emically a form of
'structuration' which has its own kind of feedback loop upon historical
awareness and symbolisms--it represents a prioritization of 'ethnic' values
providing a sense of purpose and order behind and motivation for ethnic
identification--it is the development of a consistent ethnically defined value
orientation and value system which becomes traditionally sanctioned through its
consensus of adherence and its persistence or perseveration through historical
process. It is a truism that those who think and perceive themselves as being
ethnically distinct, will, if appropriately rewarded, set about systematically
becoming or making themselves ethnically distinct and different. The lines are
thus drawn for battle, the boundaries become well mapped out for future way.
This is not so much a static social structure as it is a
dynamic social individual process which is phenomenological, historical,
hermeneutical and existential in character. This is not to say that there is no
such thing as a kind of 'social structure'--a corporate organizational identity
and entity, which is tied to the emergence and historical patterning of this
social process--in part 'structuring' the orientation and directionality which
it assumes. But any such patterning becomes necessarily influenced by unexpected
change and unpredictable human agency. From historical epoch to historical
epoch, its name may remain the same, and its principles of organization or
structuration may be similar, but its entire content and substance will have
become completely, irreversibly altered beyond any previous recognition. This
process can only be understood within an historical/hermeneutic framework.
Raising ethnic consciousness is a means of increasing the
social distance between groupings and of maintaining ethnic solidarity,
conspicuousness and symbolic boundary--identification within and between groups,
primarily by symbolic process. Ethnic symbolization provides 'meaning
structures' which are metalogical and metaphorical, which in the inherence of
their presumed 'naturalness' and 'givenness' become un-self reflexive--built in
and thereby unquestioned. They are thereby harder to see structurally, hidden
beneath a veneer, a vestige, a façade of 'ethnicality' or 'ethnicity'--they are
rendered invisible beneath an ethnic disguise or mask. Ethnic symbolization
provides the significant markers of the general process, symbols which are drawn
from an historical-mythological-ideological reservoir--symbols of 'people hood'
and of heritage, tradition, origin or 'roots' of common values, models,
baselines, expectations, goals, dreams and stereotypes. Such symbolization
process is largely mythological which becomes ideological in praxis when it
becomes enacted. Such symbols are employed purposively, arbitrarily and
cunningly to effect the 'awakening' of ethnic consciousness or the elevation or
achievement of the 'realization' of a distinctive, special, unique ethnic
identity. It is primarily an attempt to create within group similarity, unity,
solidarity--a conceived and perceived sense of commonness. Ethnic identity
becomes a kind of uniform and uniformity, complete with its badges of authority
and tokens of membership. It manufactures token equality of status in order to
achieve without group projection of difference or prejudice. Within group
differences of class and/or status become regularized and 'naturalized' and thus
down played and eventually 'repressed' from conscious awareness--while such
differences become pronounced or played up or projected upon members of out
groups who likewise appear 'one of a kind'. Within group differences are
generally, purposefully, dutifully ignored and neglected--differences
originating in individuals are displaced to the group level, and between group
differences become 'over emphasized' and thereby 'reified' or 'hypostatized'.
The stereotypes take on in their everyday use a feeling of objectivity, a common
senseness of truth, a concrete appearance of substantiality which obviates and
obfuscates its contrived artificiality, its superficiality, its own simple
mindedness. Always underneath such processes of 'ethnic honor' and
'ethnocentrism' is a deep seated jealousy, selfish desire for wanting to be
different but lacking the courage to do so--an ad hoc living by proxy only, a
vicariousness of desire--the grass is greener on the other side orientation
which comes from frustration, anger, unhappiness within one's own existential
predicament. Chinese are no different from Americans or any other grouping in
this 'fundamentalness' of 'human nature'--it is indeed universal in
structure--just as childishness is universal to the condition of childhood. So
humanness, mature or underdeveloped, is a universal condition of humanity,
whether it becomes 'realized' in human reality or not. This form of symbolic
process is common and characteristic of all human groupings. Conflictual
tensions created by within group inequalities become effectively displaced or
enervatively neutralized upon targeted counter reference out groups by a process
of cognitive perceptive 'group counter transference' of affective, emotional
symbolically constituted 'things' and their 'interrelations'. Curiously the out
group is never allowed to speak for itself except that it becomes translated in
a negative fashion--individual character differences of the members of out
groups become ignored, with only a stereotyped façade visible from without.
Learning to see within group differences means simultaneously concomitantly
breaking through, or seeing through between group barriers and boundaries, while
simultaneously seeing between group similarities. The human other on the other
side becomes more individuated, more distinct, more human as the self becomes
more complexly differentiated. Groups become more complex--group identity
becomes more problematic, more highly individuated. Statistics give way to
names, names give way to faces, faces give way to personalities, personalities
become people, human beings. Group identity looses its taken for granted
natural, ascriptive quality--achievement by group standards and values of
success or orientation become defined in more complex, universalistic ways. When
wearing a monotypical mask it becomes much easier to make of it what one wills,
to ignore real natural differences and similarities. At the same time, the
individual character of the in group members become more pronounced, dramatic,
even exaggerated beyond recognition. Status symbols hide human realities.
If ethnic consciousness is to be awakened, and promoted or
promulgated, then there is a need for the promulgation of a primary reference
group around which one's symbolic markers are to be oriented. The most basic
theme of the primary reference group is a special sacred status based upon a
sentiment of common origin and an appetite for a common cultural
heritage--"A categorical ascription is an ethnic ascription when it
classifies a person in term of his basic, most general identity, presumptively
determined by his origin and background." (Barth; 1969: 13) Ethnic
consciousness of a distinctive common origin is promoted as an important aspect
of a status role relationship. There is also a necessity in drawing the ethnic
boundary identification to have a designated counter reference out group which
will serve as a common target for projection, as a common enemy against which to
achieve consolidation. Ethnicity is forged in the political economic
transactions of inter-group relations--in order to promote ethnic consciousness
and identification it is necessary to first create a distinctive group upon
which the badge of ethnic honor can be hung, the tattoo of ethnic status
inscribed. It also becomes important to create a common enemy which also forms a
counter ethnic grouping against which all comparisons and contrasts deemed to be
negative or 'relativizing' can have some kind of externalized validity--without
the visibility, the conspicuous presence of this kind of 'anti-identity'
competing as it were within the same living space, or eco-niches, for the same
resources, then ethnic identity would have no apparent, substantial basis for
group solidarity, corporate organization and mobilization and would thus likely
fission or fragment into splinter groupings. There also occurs the presence
frequently of a third or in between grouping which in a sense becomes inherently
self contradictory, ambivalent, Janus faced. I will call this the intermediary
reference grouping which tends to occupy a precarious in between position of
enforced neutrality and of ambivalent status and ambiguous identity. In this
sense, though dealt with, they are not to be trusted--serving as indirect
reference groupings upon which conflictual or contractual relations between the
other two groups may be harmlessly displaced or safely neutralized. They are
viewed as potential turncoats--useful allies but untrustworthy traitors who must
be kept in view--whose loyalty and genuine commitment is always suspect. On the
other hand, their doubly reinforced identity and status neutrality and high
visibility renders them 'safe' for normal or 'para-normal' business
relations--as go betweens their apparent existential vulnerability renders them
safe in the sense of a special kind of 'thieves honor'. Such groupings, between
others, are usually politically interdependent and independently powerless,
forming more of an economic class than an ethnic status grouping. Status becomes
class tied. It is because they are relatively powerless, without apparent
hierarchy, that such groupings serve as safe if dangerous go betweens, even if
somewhat nefarious, immoral or unethical in conduct--they are 'without honor'
divested of 'status'.
The symbolic importance of status ascription follows from a
psycho-social sense of insecurity and felt need for social solidarity reinforced
by primary symbolisms--social insecurity and the need for group solidarity beget
a kind of symbolic dependency, a predisposition to employ social symbolisms
projectively in a pronounced, public fashion and to express repressed, 'illicit'
symbolisms privately in a repetitive, obsessive compulsive manner. That this may
be directly tied to sexual repression is possible. There is a failure of
cognitive control over their manipulation or deployment. The media and its role
in fostering ethnic consciousness and symbolic boundary identification cannot be
underestimated in the subliminal, pre-conscious cultivation and manipulation of
this form of psycho-social dependency. I believe there can be found a high
correlation between this form of symbolic dependency, if somehow measurable, and
three differential forms of characteriological authoritarianism, as well as with
perhaps other forms of social psychological pre-dispositions or character
structures. I believe the various forms of authoritarianism which I briefly
describe here to be but differential symptomatic expressions of a common fixated
motivational source which is symbolically dependent and therefore neurotically
frustrated, for its manifestations. These forms of authoritarianism are
conditioned by, contextualized within, and connected to alternative modes of
social 'structuralism' which tend to foster or reinforce and in turn become
reinforced by, alternative socio-structural forms.
In general, authoritarianism is correlated negatively with
high achievement motivation as defined by McClelland et. al., which is in turn
associated positively with high self esteem. Self esteem is interdependent and
defined by social status. Self esteem, achievement motivation and
authoritarianism must also be associated with a social situational context--the
'moment' of class or status mentioned by Weber--which is pre-structured by
social stratification, class relations and status group identity.
Authoritarianism is somewhat conveniently also contrasted in a relativistic
sense with egalitarianism--authoritarianism begets closed minded preoccupation
with hierarchical social relations and symbols of hierarchy which may be
associated with political hierarchy, economic class and social status rank.
Depending upon which of these kinds of hierarchy are stressed, authoritarianism
becomes expressed differently with each kind--'paternalistic authoritarianism'
is associated with traditional colonial social orders--feudal or semi-feudal,
while 'competitive authoritarianism' resembles the classic 'f-scale' profile and
is associated with competitive relations in an economically defined market
arena. The final form is 'regal ritual' authoritarianism, and becomes associated
with a 'true believer' profile of the fanatical ideologue who is to be found in
the bureaucratic hierarchies of world order society. This type is also
associated with a kind of two value, monothetic, concrete logic, or concrete
thinking. Its modern form is the restrictedly rational routine operationally
efficient marionette who is more preoccupied with numbers than with
people--manipulating 'things' rather than human beings. There are other types of
authoritarianism, each begetting a different epistemological model of
conceptioning
Also it is important to note the opposite of 'status honor'
or 'ethnic honor' as 'negative status honor'--a 'third world' mentality of
believed in intrinsic inferiority, low self esteem, of chronic belittlement,
preoccupation with failure leading to perfectionism and 'choking'. It is a self
consciousness of failure and inferiority, and a failure and inferiority of self
consciousness. It is linked to a 'culture of poverty' orientations as well as a
spurious poverty of culture. It becomes reflected in airport arts of
acculturation. No one wants to be a 'niggar'--especially not the Blacks. We are
dealing in this sense with an accepted, embedded, institutionally established
and reinforced, colonialized, cultural or ethnic inferiority complex which
undermines motivation, models of achievement and effective group or social
action.
Besides the first, exogenous set of factors of the common
cultural historical context of a post colonial political economy and the ethnic
status role of 'merchant minority middlemen' within such a framework, there are
I believe at least four interrelated factors contributing to Nanyang ethnicity
of overseas 'Chineseness'. These four sets of factors are:
1. The stereotypical socio-structural form of organization of
overseas Chinese communities and commercial enterprises.
2. An historically and socially well developed network of
commercial relations which contribute to enduring long distances structural
relations of power within developing 'situations of complexity'.
3. A relatively open class structure which is reinforced by a
common cultural ethos of 'Confucian' values and which encourages educational
mobility, entrepreneurial risk taking, strong achievement and competitive
motivations and value orientations.
4. And finally, a common cultural ethos stressing
paternalistic and particularistic and personalistic values of parental
authority, familial piety, traditional education, pragmatic value orientation,
hard work and educational achievement, set within a competitive colonial
political economic milieu which is reinforced by commonly prescribed values of
'Chinesenesss' in cuisine, dress and past times, and which reinforces No. 3
above.
Each of the four sets of factors will be dealt with in turn,
but it must be recognized at the outset that whereas the former 'exogenous' set
of etic factors might be seen as 'structural', these 'endogenous' set of emic
factors might be construed as 'functional' in the Malinowskian sense. This kind
of functionalism must be tempered by an appreciation of the cultural historical
process in which it is embedded and from which it has been extracted. It is only
an explanation of a patterning and not the cultural reality itself.
1. The most salient factor of the effectiveness of Nanyang
ethnicity is the widespread presence of overseas Chinese communities which are
politically and economically integrated along a common line of segmentary
corporate group structure organized 'sub-ethnically' upon an ad hoc,
situationally defined basis, along the lines of principles of ethnic origin and
heritage--locality, lineage descent and language. This common type of segmentary
'kongsi' and 'pang' or 'fang' organization, which may range in size and
definition anywhere from "a group of 2 or more unrelated persons of the
same sex forming a household" (Kaye Barrington; 1960) to an essentially
transnational clanship or secret society or dialect organization. This kind of
organizational structure, in its adaptiveness to situational demands, and
preexisting capacity for mobilizing activity and coordinating it, has been
proffered as the secret of Chinese organizational success in commerce, inspite
of their plasticity, 'camouflage, puffery and fragility'. "Students of the
Overseas Chinese societies are familiar with the traditional clan and surname
associations, secret societies, pang and kongsi work groups, and
the varied combinations among the Chinese forming their own interest groups…In
fact the overseas Chinese have always been known to be one of the most
organization oriented people in the history of modern man." (Siaw: 398)
These organizational structures are inherently paradoxical in being 'ethnical
like' organizations and yet mitigating against an overall communalism of pan
Chineseness. "Hence, these mutual feelings of belonging together have
produced no positive system of identification." (Siaw: 398) Most noteworthy
was the strength and influence of the Chinese secret societies in the Nanyang as
a basis for political economic consolidation. "The extent of their
influence can be judged at least by the fact that no sizable group of Chinese
immigrants could engage in any kind of trade, business or industry without the
support of a particular branch of the secret society." (Simoniya: 41) Yet
despite this sense of solidarity, such organizational structures were always
inherently divisive--"Any misunderstandings or dispute arising among
various dialect groups of Chinese immigrants usually results in desperate
struggle (frequently an armed struggle) between their supporting secret
societies, sometimes going on for years." (Simoniya: 41)
"…Their social organization enabled them to overcome
the problems of land, labor and capital and in effect gave to Chinese
agricultural enterprise some of the characteristics of the corporation, the
device that finally enabled the Europeans to reach a dominant position in
plantation crop productions.
Basic to Chinese agricultural enterprise were the social
institutions giving it cohesion, the clan, kongsi and above all, the secret
society. These provided the capital for financing the acquisition of land from
native rulers, organized the import of immigrant sinkhek labor from China for
the work of cultivation, kept the laborers supplied with provisions including
the indispensable opium, and marketed the produce. All the participants were
rewarded with a share of the profits if any (thus anticipating a system of
estate wages linked to the current price of the commodity produced by the
estate), less expenses incurred on their behalf,, which in the case of the
laborers who were indebted with the cost of their provisions and opium, were
very substantial. But inevitably the lion's share of the profits went to the
merchants of Singapore or Malacca…who in effect provided the entrepreneurial
functions and to the semi-feudal headmen or kangchus who performed the
managerial functions." (Fryer; Emerging Southeast Asia, 1970: 62)
As a self governing community of members with shared economic
interests and political aspirations, kongsi's were "the natural outcome of
the experience of Chinese immigrants who had come to a strange land in compact
clan and village groups and who had to find ways to secure their livelihood,
self protection and governance." (Chin; 1981: 15-16) Though the modeled was
borrowed from South China, its form and functionality was variously adapted,
localized in different Nanyang contexts.
"Partnerships, generally called kongsi, or 'companies'
almost always lacked legal and written contracts between members. The partners
verbally agreed on the requirements for capital accumulation and spending,
division of profits and the divisions to be made upon a reshuffling or
dissolution of the partnership. They simply followed certain, rather loose
conventions. This system meant great ease in creating capital combines, but it
also made for many conflicts, misunderstandings and unscrupulous
manipulations." (Omohundro; 1981: 70)
Understanding of this kongsi system and the organizational
complexity of Nanyang communities cannot be had without appreciating these focal
manifestations of a 'business culture' or 'merchant way of life' which has its
praxis, its norms of commercial life, and which exerts 'an enormous shaping
influence on the rest of community life.' 'Business activity' constitutes a
cultural 'given to which their socio-cultural life must adapt.' "The
community's institutional structure, its kinship practices and its family life
are molded about the shopkeeping life." (Omohundro; 1981: 46) This 'way of
life' also has an important history of development against which it needs to be
contextualized.
"After completing the place of worship the early Chinese
immigrants organized themselves socially in a different manner. Having been
uprooted from the Chinese homeland and replanted on foreign soil with its
strange customs, the immigrants felt, as did other migrant groups elsewhere, the
necessity of clinging tenaciously to the way of life that they had to leave
behind in China. This nostalgia is a common human characteristic. As soon as
they were well established the immigrants tried to satisfy this nostalgia by
organizing clan associations which would bring together people of the same clan
or locality in a congenial setting where they could continue familiar interests
and practices. Although most clan associations began by catering for people of
the same clan or neighborhood in China, many enlarged their membership by
accepting people of the same dialect group or of the same surname although
belonging to different clan and localities. These latter grew into full fledged
community associations.
Clan associations helped the immigrants to strengthen group
solidarity, promote understanding between members, enhance their social and
economic welfare and foster closer cooperation with other clans. They were
generally able to take over diverse social roles from clan temples such as the
administration of a burial ground, the organization of clan festivities and
other seasonal celebrations, thus releasing the temple premises for worship and
other religious purposes. The clan associations also became a venue for the
distribution of charities and for alms giving to the less fortunate members of
the association and their families, the provision of accommodation and
assistance to its aged and destitute; and the association's premises often
served many different varieties of communal uses." (Chin; 1981: 81-82)
In general, even though the definition of what a kongsi is
ranges from small living arrangements to business enterprises, to larger,
inter-city clan organizations, the kongsi system shares certain important
attributes--it is primarily a corporate grouping organized longitudinally and
diachronically along basic principles of locality of origin, occupation,
dialect, descent, surname, for the purpose of ensuring long term economic
political security and stability in an inherently unstable environment. Its
primary purpose was political economic mobilization of limited capital. There
was complementary with this kind of corporate organization a cross cutting form
of associational organization on a voluntary, versus ascriptive basis, which
reinforced this with a kind of latitudinal integrity--synchronically organizing
actors and agents across space. This mode of organization was strongly
associated with occupational monopolization and paralegal economic and political
activities in coolie trafficking, prostitution, gambling, opium and facilitated
in the mobilization of political resources, its primary function being to ensure
political stability, hierarchical continuity at any single instant or episode of
history, and to effect political consolidation during crises periods of
political instability or turmoil. Thus longitudinal clan kongsi's and
latitudinal chambers of commerce, dialect associations, secret societies and
business kongsi's were mutually complementary in reinforcing Chinese community
solidarity, while simultaneously the cross current patterning tended to undercut
and undermine overall communalism or spirit of communal Chineseness, tending
instead to produce a recognizable ceiling of segmentary fissioning of small
groupings, organized competitively for private interest, or special mutual
interests. Thus the competitive strength of Chinese organization proves its own
greatest shortcoming to achieving 'community closure'.
Individual actors inhabited discontinuous inter-positions or
multiple 'nesting' positions within several overlapping organizational
frameworks. Their status roles were largely situationally and circumstantially
defined, and loyalties tended to be undermined by several allegiances. Thus
corporate organizations benefited from access to a broad network of overlapping
hierarchical spheres of affiliation, while simultaneously suffering from an
inherent structural weakness of a lack of undivided commitment--shifting
loyalties and membership as individuals navigated and maneuvered between several
ladders of success. Options becoming closed in one hierarchy, an individual
might easily shift with a minimum of downward mobility. Though the status of
Chineseness was highly ascriptive but hierarchically open, multiple criss
crossing statues within multiple hierarchical structural frameworks, ensured a
high level of potential mobility for the individual--diagonal mobility which is
tied to ethnic status of 'Chineseness'.
The segmentary structure of ethnic Chinese corporate
organization also meant that ethnic status overall was largely positional,
personal, relative and conditional to ascriptive, achieved and voluntary
statuses--the system was to some extent flexible rendering it highly adaptable
to changing environmental circumstances in many varied situations. It also
assured that Chinese ethnicity with all its dialectical 'sub-ethnicities' was
highly personalistic and particularistic--'Chineseness', though overall in an
absolute ascriptive category--even this broke down--was finely divided
internally in degree and kind. Intra-ethnic strife and competition was as
important as inter-ethnic competition and conflict. "…partnerships are
volatile organizations due to domestic matters, old fashioned management methods
and the personalistic nature of the money handling and power structure…"
(Omohundro; 1981)
"…the Chinese were principally local traders and
individuals who built their private fortunes wherever they could. Invariably
theirs were little firms with a tendency for any large organization to be
ephemeral, or, at best, to be quickly splintered into other little firms."
(Wang Gungwu; 1959: 20)
"The kongsi never enjoyed any sovereignty in their
territory. In its internal structure the kongsi institution resembled the guild
organization in which family ties were very strong and which was built
exclusively on the geographic or dialect principle: only the immigrants from the
same village or province of China, speaking the same dialect, could become
kongsi. A distinctive feature and important function of these (as all the other)
associations of Chinese immigrants was the mutual aid practiced by their
members, which was of enormous importance in view of their lack of rights and
helpless conditions in the countries of Southeast Asia. At the same time, it
should be emphasized that inequality was the dominant feature within the kongsi
organization. Taking advantage of their privileged status, the leaders of these
associations amassed fabulous wealth by ruthlessly exploiting the Chinese
coolies." (Simoniya; 1961: 40)
The second endogenous factor contributing to Nanyang
ethnicity concerns a cultural historical patterning of a long term established
networking among Chinese traders via the Nanyang connection. The merchant
Chinese have a long and continuous presence in the history of Southeast Asia.
They have consistently contributed to the regional development of Southeast
Asian civilization even though their contributions have long been downplayed and
unrecognized. Long enduring long distance trade networks developed which formed
part of the regional structure of Southeast Asia. The Chinese merchant has been
held as the principal agent of these networks. The Chinese communities, large
and with their overlapping organizational structures, formed the nodes of
intersections of these networks--facilitating and mobilizing the exchange of
capital, the movement of sojourners, the exchange of commodities, finance and
resources. Commercial centers and trade entreports served as a kind of maritime
merchant capital cities of the Nanyang Nation. Credit associations and financial
institutions facilitated the movement through the Nanyang trade network. Centers
and capitals may wax and wane, cities and Chinatowns may come and go, but always
there remained a complex network of many other such nodal points of articulation
to fill in. the enduring persistence of such networks provided the necessary
'developing situations of complexity' as preconditions for regional development
and growth--enabling Chinese to pioneer new settlements and enterprises and to
open new markets and providing a stable base for community growth and cultural
development. Without the presence of such a network, so extensive and
multi-layered, the overseas Chinese would not have become so economically
successful. The Nanyang trade network was the substratum of an overseas Chinese
empire. This empire maintained a tenuous long distant if somewhat sensitive ties
to the Chinese mainland. Indeed, Southern China was shaped as much by these
South China sea connections of the 'floating Chinese' as it helped to shape the
Nanyang itself.
"The sojourning pattern, immigrant associations, credit
arrangements competitive strategies, the Chinese family and the apprentice
system, as Chinese cultural patterns, all confer commercial advantages upon the
immigrant merchants…" (Omohundro; 1977: 129-130)
"Writing with this in mind, George Weightman (1960)
developed his historical study of the Philippine Chinese, describing them as a
'marginal trading community'. They are marginal in the sense that Robert Park
(1928: 881) defined the culturally 'marginal man'. Economically, however, they
are dead center; the legendary middleman. Besides being culturally marginal,
they are definitely also a community…" (Omohundro; 1981: 47)
Chinese commercial activities had long formed an integral
part of the internal trade and commerce of the region. The coming of the
Europeans crowded them off the foreign markets,, but they retain their control
over domestic markets, which during the colonial period developed into powerful
monopolies in a number of spheres of exchange. "It should be pointed out
that the rigid organization of the Chinese bourgeois played a very important
part in the consolidation of its position in domestic trade as well as in the
handicraft and other branches of production." (Simoniya; 1961: 40) The
Chinese were organized into a 'ramified network of buyers' who could buy up
small scale production for large markets. "…the inevitable result of this
purely economic advantage of large scale sales was that the small producer was
cut off from the market and found himself helpless before the power of
commercial capital." The colonial framework augmented this commercial
pattern. The direct producer was effectively cut off from the markets by this
network, rendering them completely dependent upon the buyer. The buyer became
the only source of credit which extended from the big monopolies. The net result
was the credit bondage of primary producers to the buyers. "Running through
the vast network of business middleman, however, is an invisible chain of
economic mutual dependence with which these middleman are chained to the general
chariot of colonial exploitation in the countries of Southeast Asia."
(Simoniya; 1961: 43) Commodity credit and finance became a powerful means of
control over the network of buyers by the big monopolies.
"Another characteristic features was that the buyer was,
as a rule, also a retail merchant. He supplies products to the cities and ports
where he acquired import commodities to be resold in the villages. He frequently
paid for his products with imported commodities, thereby cutting off the
peasants not only from his own product market but also from the market of
industrial manufactures." (Simoniya; 1961: 44)
A large measure of the success of the Chinese commercial
networks is the facilitation of via a system of well established credit
networks--an individual's credit 'rating' was dependent upon maintaining a
reputation for successful and sound business practices, and for trustworthiness.
Loss of face or shame would be avoided because it would damage an individual's
ability to secure credit when it is important to do so. One's reputation or
credit rating are linked to one's status within the community. Commercial
success is directly related to this status--the ability to improve or climb the
ladder of success was tied to the capacity for securing credit and hence to
one's status. Therefore it was important to 'show good fact' to the community to
improve one's status. The credit itself flowed in a well developed network,
albeit from the top down--"The credit system…'descended in a cascade'
from the large import-export merchants and wholesalers to the hierarchy of
smaller traders in the market centers and villages throughout the country."
(Clifton. A. Barton; 1983: 51) This kind of reputation conveyed status not only
of credit rating, trustworthiness, or economic reliability, but also an
individual' social and psychological characteristics. It operated on two
levels--'of specific interpersonal relationships which a businessman maintained
with members of his social network' and 'as a more general reputation for
trustworthy behavior and credit worthiness which a merchant commanded in the
community at large'. Such a general reputation increased the range of potential
business contacts, contracts and opportunities. Business could be initiated
among those with well developed reputations much more easily and safely, thus
reducing the risks of extending credit at long range. Such reputations
facilitated long distance mobility of finance and capital so important to the
success of business enterprises.
"One of the main contentions of this paper is that the
Chinese were able to succeed in Vietnam because they developed mechanisms for
generating interpersonal trust and regulating business behavior in the absence
of a well functioning formal legal system. The Chinese approach to business was
based upon personal relationships and word of mouth agreements. And these verbal
agreements relied solely on mutual trust--sun yung--backed by informal
group sanctions. Under these rules, if a merchant was not trustworthy and
reliable, that is, if he lacked sun yung, it would be impossible for him
to do business. Once the fact that a merchant had failed to honor his word
became known, other merchants would simply refuse to do business with him."
(Clifton Barton; 1983: 53)
"Participation in only a small number of the
associations which every Chinese businessman had available to him provided a
merchant with sources of information and a wide range of potential business
contacts. Generally the strategy of successful merchants seemed to be to
maintain large numbers of persons in the 'known' category through minimal
participation in a large number of association and social activities. If they
subsequently needed to contact someone either for information or to initiate a
business transaction, common group membership and prior acquaintance smoothed
the way.
Common group membership creates among merchants a
'presumption of trust' and this, in itself, gives certain advantages to
businessmen…" (Barton; 1983: 60)
Also related to Chinese networking success are the kinds and
degree of network relationships established over the course of an individual's
career development. It has been found that as much as fifty percent of the
average businessman's ties are kin related or very personalistic. Important are
'fictive kin ties' who act as benefactors in business relationships. Business
success and social networks are always interactive. More kinsmen are found on
the inside as coworkers in successful businesses than as benefactors from the
outside.
"Almost all Chinese…have available to them a wide
variety of social relationship with which to reinforce their commercial
connections. Consanguine kinsmen, in-laws, persons from the same hometown,
classmates and others may play roles in a Chinese business. To have connections
with persons or businesses who offer favors, loans, emergency assistance or
inside information, who can be trusted and by whom one will be trusted, is
clearly to have a commercial advantage in an erratic, potentially hostile,
highly competitive economy…" (Omohundro; 1983: 67-68)
Marriage becomes a business merger, whether or not love is
involved--'love will grow'. "The consequence of this endogamy and
residential stability is a thick web of kin and business interconnections that
serve to reinforce partnerships, import-wholesale-retail distributor chains,
credit arrangements, commercial apprenticeships and other business deals."
(Omohundro: 69) 'To the Chinese, money and marriage is serious business.'
"The Philippines Chinese merchant community is thus in
constant evolutionary motion by means of small incremental choices all
individuals are making to secure their security and livelihood…change in the
merchant community comes from the statistical trend of these small and constant
network adjustments. All merchants participate in this statistical trend of
minute changes over time…Individuals are ruined and rewarded and the resulting
pool of cultural values and strategies, though based predominantly upon
preexisting cultural material, is altered in emphasis, in proportions.
…No particular network configuration or role application of
decision making rules will always insure a merchant's success, since the
environment is constantly changing and success is probabilistic…But merchants
are aware of their stakes, the odds, and the rules of the game through their
patterns of social and business networks are imitated by or passed on to others,
while failures either change their ways or leave the ethnic group, then the
'Chinese community' is a changed entity." (Omohundro; 'Social Networks and
Business Success for the Philippine Chinese' in The Chinese in Southeast Asia
Vol. 1, edited by Peter Gosling: 80)
3. Consideration of network patterns among the Nanyang
Chinese leads directly into consideration of the third set of endogenous
factors--that of class stratification within the Chinese community. Indeed, the
status linked to one's credit rating and community standing is a guide for class
determination, just as the networks of credit and exchange relations tends to
recapitulate the class structure of the Nanyang, arranged as it is as a kind of
loosely structured pyramidal hierarchy. The status rating based upon the need to
take business risks with unknown partners, creates a kind of 'moral community'
of traders who are arranged along a rank order system based upon grades of
trustworthiness. In this hierarchy of gradations and determinations, ethnicity
is the primary principle employed to mark off the insider/outsider boundary of
the group--there is a tendency for insider networks towards ethnic homogeneity.
"Confucian ethics in the overseas Chinese society,
prescribes differences in the pattern of mutual aid obligations between people
with varying degrees of social distance within a well defined social
structure--near kinsmen, distant kinsmen, clansmen, fellow villagers and fellow
Hokkiens. Kinship relations, in which social distance is at a minimum, are strong
ties that involve the severest degree of constraint in dealings among kinsmen.
This is because kinship relations are the irreducible jural and moral relations.
Because of this, kinsmen are the most trustworthy people with whom to trade.
Because of the existence of differences in the degree of behavioral
constraint, each of the five categories of members occupies a special place
within the overall social structure of the Hokkien ethnic community. This
implies that different behavioral patterns can be predicted for each category
of members corresponding to their location in the social structure."
(Janet Landa; 'The Political Economy of the Ethnically Homogeneous Chinese
Middleman Group in Southeast Asia: Ethnicity and Entrepreneurship in a Plural
Society' in The Chinese in Southeast Asia Vol. 1, edited by Peter
Gosling; 1983: 98)
It is not too difficult to imagine many merchant middleman
employing a similar rational calculus by which to make business decisions and
determinations of business relationships and thereby for a kind of social
stratification along ethnic and sub-ethnic lines to occur overall. Chinese
middleman success is directly related to the capacity for collective action via
mutual aid arrangements which facilitate entrepreneurship. When such rank order
determinations are consistently and statistically significantly employed, and
become consistently linked to 'status ratings' of individual within networks,
then it is not too difficult to imagine a kind of class hierarchy crystallizing
from the network patterning--status becomes class tied via money. There occurs a
solid class structure which is spread across the Nanyang and which serves to
unify the Nanyang merchant empire into essentially pyramidal hierarchy which
spans the rural urban continuum, with the rural laborers at the base, and the
rich commercial elite in the commercial capitals at the apex. At its apex are a
small elite group who inhabit the major commercial centers. At its apex are a
small elite group who inhabit the major commercial centers. In between is a
range of small merchants and petty shopkeepers and corporate managers. At the
base of this pyramid is a teeming mass of indentured laborers and coolie
population--a labor surplus which is readily mobilizable and therefore highly
exploitable. At the top sets a financial apparatus in the form of a commercial
banking institution. In between is an elaborate system of credit, money
handling, trade and property ownership. This pyramidal structure provided the
necessary class leadership of the Nanyang empire.
"The economic stratification of Sarawak's Chinese
society--or alternatively the interrelationship between rural and urban
economy--is arranged like a pyramid, with a broad base of laborers and
agriculturalists in rural areas, a class or rural bazaar shopkeepers in the
middle, an at the apex a small number of big business and industrialists who
actually control the economy…and who usually become the recognized leaders of
the community. Whether in the prewar or post war period the economic strata in
the Chinese community have stayed substantially unaltered. It is through this
economic stratification that social power is channeled and leadership structure
traditionally developed.
…Because of interrelationship between rural bazaar
shopkeepers and urban businessmen as between the latter and the top merchants,
it can be seen that social power was channeled through the rural shopkeepers
(who derived it from the grassroots agriculturalists by the granting of credits)
to the urban businessmen, and again through the latter to the top merchants…"
(John Chin; 1981: 76-77)
Overseas class structure has been divided into a three tiered
hierarchy with two sub-divisions of each stratum. At the top was the Shang class
which was composed of shopkeepers, exporters and importers, plantation owners,
property owners, financiers and tin mining proprietors. This was sub-divided
into two groups--capitalists and general merchants. "The former consisted
of exporters and importers, big plantation owners, tin mining proprietors, big
contractors, property owners and financiers; while the latter consisted of
shopkeepers, general traders and small plantation owners. The middle class was
the Shih class composed of clerks of foreign and Chinese firms, junior
government officers, interpreters, school teachers and professional. The Shih
was sub-divided into upper and lower class groupings, with professionals, junior
government officials, interpreters and clerks occupying the upper middle class
and the Chinese school teachers and clerks of Chinese firms occupying the lower
middle class positions. The lower working class was referred to as the Kung
class and was composed of artisans, shop assistants, plantation workers, mining
workers and rickshaw pullers, which was sub-divided between artisans and
laborers, with the former consisting of 'carpenters, blacksmiths, goldsmiths,
bricklayers, mechanics, cooks and tailors; while the latter consisted of shop
assistants, plantation workers, mining workers, and rickshaw pullers. The
dividing line between the artisans and general workers was the possession of a
skill.'
"…Thus at the apex of the class hierarchy in the
overseas Chinese community in this period was a small group of capitalists and
in descending order a large group of general merchants, a small middle class, a
small group of artisans and a large group of general workers."
Status distinctions, life styles, sumptuary, polygamy, power
and prestige were all class tied. Dress served to create social distance. Class
frequently became the self fulfilling prophecy of success or failure, fortune
and hard work or misfortune and laziness. Class relations were principally ones
of political economic interdependency and exploitation, transacted through
paternalistic superior subordinate occupational roles.
"…three points need to be borne in mind; firstly, the
overseas Chinese community was a predominantly immigrant society; secondly, it
was a subordinate community in terms of power and authority; and thirdly, it was
an urban community. Its nature thus determined its class structure. As an
immigrant community, it was characterized by an unstable population. Many
immigrants treated their time overseas as a sojourn rather than settlement;
those who succeeded in making enough money returned to China, while many others
continued to travel overseas to try their luck. This fluctuation in population
affected the profile of the class structure and so membership of the classes, in
particular the workers, changed frequently. Since the community was a
subordinate one, it did not have a fully grown class system, comprising a ruling
class and a sizable peasant class, as in China. As it was predominantly urban,
it produced largely merchants and workers a rather than landlords and
peasants." (Yen Ching-hwang; 1986)
"The main characteristic of the overseas Chinese class
system was its fluidity. There was no legal barrier to social mobility, nor was
there a competitive examination system that people had to go through before
higher status could be acquired. Wealth was the main determinant of social
mobility; those who possessed it moved up to the apex of the class hierarchy and
those who lost it descended, even down to the bottom…(Yen; 1986: 143)
4. Closely related to the class structure of overseas Chinese
society are the patterns and opportunities for social mobility which were or
have been prevalent, and how these opportunities have been related to
achievement motivation, values of hard work, thrift, skills in money handling,
and a strong emphasis upon educational attainment. The ethnic Chinese have had a
long list of Kapitans China and Towkay business entrepreneurs to look up to as
symbols of success, leadership, as embodiments of their Horatio Alger myth. The
class structure was relatively open. Power and social status were tied directly
to wealth and economic success. Wealth and social status and power went hand in
hand. Money bought privilege and power tended to create opportunities for
wealth. The traditional Chinese social structure is noteworthy for its relative
openness for climbing its ranks. But this relative openness did not mean that
opportunity was equal for the sons of the poor as it was for sons of the wealthy
and influential. Many created screens of opportunity and class structure tended
to propagate itself. There are a set of interrelated factors affecting this
social mobility--'intelligence'--i.e. education, skills, information, talents
would be cultivated and utilized.
Group relationships within social networks created or
fostered screens of support if not opportunity for social mobility. The capacity
to overcome certain social disqualifications--indebtedness, indentured service,
and especially gambling, enabled an individual to save money in order to invest.
More frequently mobility was by small, gradual increments, rather than the
phenomenal Horatio Alger. For the skilled artisans and members of the lower
middle class, upward mobility was easier than for unskilled laborers. These
middle class merchants achieved success as small or petty businessmen and as
commercial entrepreneurs.
"For unskilled workers (coolies), upward social mobility
was more difficult. These included the workers in plantations and mines, and
rickshaw pullers. As their labor could be easily replaced, they lost their
bargaining power. Because of hard physical labor and frustration, they tended to
indulge in gambling, opium smoking and recourse to prostitutes. This further
reduced their ability to save. In fact, only a small number of them succeeded in
moving up the social ladder. There were several ways of achieving this upward
mobility: to move up from rickshaw puller to rickshaw owner, or to become a
hawker, peddler, or small planter and then a merchant…After succeeding in
small business, they could then start a shop and become a merchant. To be a
merchant was to be known and recognized…the acquisition of merchant status was
important because a certain prestige were accorded to it." (Yen; 1986:
161-162)
Education has been important to the Chinese, especially
traditional Chinese schooling which resurrected the traditional Chinese
Confucian cultural orientation and ethos. It facilitated upward social mobility
but was not necessarily a ticket to success for the underclass. This traditional
type of education fostered a didactic Confucian value orientation which was
pragmatic in nature--defining individual responsibility for 'circumstantial
control' over events. Shame entailed unforgivable loss of face at being careless
in allowing mistakes to happen. The traditional ethos of the Chinese home
reinforced this ethos--as children could on one hand be carelessly over indulged
and yet not be allowed to get their clothes dirty. No one cried over spilled
milk--they were punished. Orientation of values around food and dress must be
considered important as well. Hawking food is seen as one of the principal rungs
for the socio-economic and status mobility of the Chinese underclass--eating
Chinese cuisine is the favorite pastime of all Chinese, food sharing becomes an
important means of 'income redistribution' and nutrition for a society
traditionally preoccupied with starvation. It is also ritually prescribed and
sanctioned business practice for a successful merchant to entertain his comrades
and to be a conspicuous consumer.
"…As in Chinese society today…the Chinese community
was rich in varieties of food which provided jobs as hawkers, or as meat,
vegetables and fruit peddlers…Those coolies who had saved a small sum of money
could change their jobs to become peddlers, selling general goods and local
produce…The advantages of being hawkers, peddlers, or transient peddlers were
that their business involved a small amount of capital, flexible working hours
and a better return for their labor." (Yen; 1986: 161)
In this regard, it is important to see the role of 'Chinese
restaurants' and grocery stores in the United States--one of the primary
mechanisms of upward mobility among the underclass. "If Western armies
march with their stomachs, the overseas Chinese pioneers need to work with their
taste buds. Chinese cooking has been and still is one of the main cultural
pillars that persist among the overseas Chinese…" (Lawrence Siaw: 400)
Upward mobility that was rapid tended to be single
generational, associated with a series of correct and lucrative business
decisions on the part of an individual entrepreneur that paid off, and perhaps
also this form of mobility was associated with rapid downward mobility as
well--fast fortunes come and go--and exploitation of opportunities, often
illicit, provided the chance for both quick loss and gain. More common and
sociologically interesting is a slower, intergenerational, 'statistically
incremental' form of social mobility which tended to involve members of family
networks. The work of hardworking and earnest ancestor's laid the foundation for
future generational mobility and the value orientation of parental authority and
familial piety and the cult of ancestor worship, tended to foster this kind of
mobility when and where it was steadfastly adhered to and applied.
It is held that the merchant Chinese occupied a marginal
position within a colonial political economy. The normal avenues of status
recognition are not available to marginal groups thus encouraging them to seek
alternative means of self expression and to maintain a low visibility vis-à-vis
the host society.
"Even cursory investigation was sufficient to reveal
that the economic power of the Chinese reached much further than what was
visible from the surface. One of the basic features of Chinese business
enterprise is the extent to which success is kept hidden from outsiders. Through
centuries of experience in evading the depredations of tax collectors and
officials, the Chinese have learned to maintain a low profile and conceal
business success. The outward appearance of a shop gives no real indication of
the amount of business which is transacted from it or how many other business
interests its owner is engaged in. Often a small shop with two or three
employees is the front for a booming business empire controlling dozens of other
enterprises operating behind closed doors in adjacent buildings or scattered
through seldom visited sections of the city. Often the basis of a multi-million
dollar enterprise turns out to be an inconspicuous shopkeeper, dressed in
nothing but a pair of shorts, sitting in a small, dark and very old looking
business establishment which differs not at all from scores of similar firms on
the same street. In many cases, successful Chinese firms operated in conjunction
with Vietnamese front men, either persons with political connections who could
provide protection or special licenses and privileges in exchange for a fee or
straw men who were the owners of a firm in name only and allowed the real
Chinese owners to operate in an area reserved for Vietnamese nationals. These
types of arrangements were, in some cases, the result of legislation prohibiting
foreigners from engaging in certain professions, but in other instances were
adopted by businessmen who wished to obscure their activities and operate beyond
the arm of local officials and tax collectors." (Clifton Barton; 1983:
47-48)
Marginal groups develop and ethnocentric orientation which is
one of superiority which is a reflection of high level internal solidarity and
cohesion, 'born of the need for mutual protection and reassurance'. This
position of common marginality tends to favor achievement. If the group has had
past experience in market relationships, then such achievement motivation is
likely to be economic in expression. This leads to a consideration of a common
ethnic Chinese value orientation which stresses achievement, entrepreneurships
and risk taking behavior and education. They had come with previous expertise in
money handling and in social organization for business. As a culture of
immigrants, the Chinese could not afford to fail and were preoccupied with
economic security and success. Chinese value orientations may contribute to
economic performance and those values may change as a by-product of such
experience. Social structure, with its ethnocentrism and corporate organization
for political economic mobilization, creates screens of opportunity conducive to
the successful realization of such value orientations. Social structure and
cultural ethos reinforced one another.
"The Chinese community grew and evolved out of an
environment that required two levels of value orientation. At the individual
level emphasis was on work, competition, frugality, achievement, success and
accumulation of wealth. At the social level emphasis was on cooperation, mutual
help and common endeavor within the family, the clan association and the lineage
whether in fact or in attribution. The Chinese community thus grew out of a
response to the challenges of survival, growth and consolidation. Its ethos of
work, achievement and success was consistently manifested through the social
framework and was relatively unstructured." (Tham Seong Chee; 1977: 320)
******
In concluding, it is important to reconsider the role and
meaning of Nanyang ethnicity as an example for our understanding. Many elements
are missing from this picture, not the least of which are the parts played by
women and religion in Nanyang ethnicity. The Nanyang constitutes an ethnic
community without the prerequisite 'community closure'. It is an ethnic
community characterized most by sub-ethnic diversity and divisiveness. The
Nanyang constitutes an empire from within, an imperium in imperio, with
its own historical heritage and traditional civilization. It is a nation which
exists 'overseas' a 'floating' Nanyang Nation made up of a vast and intricate
Nanyang trade network. The citizen of the Nanyang has a curious double
hyphenated status identity and a characteristically chameleon 'Chineseness'
which defies facile stereotypes. Stereotypes are useful clues in the quest for
the truth underlying human reality. They constitute the historical/hermeneutic
baseline from which we begin and to which we inevitably return. We must be very
careful in our creation of these stereotypes.
Ethnicity is a framing metaphor which in the post colonial
framework takes on the significance of its previously related notions of culture
and civilization. It connotes a style of life and living which inexorably
carries a connotation and symbolic significance of positional status within a
post colonial framework. The ethnic self, like the previous cultural self and
civilized self, carries a special significance to the relation to the ethnic
other, as defined within this post colonial framework, just as similarly the
cultural self and the civilized self also carried special signification and
connotations to the culturally and civilizationally defined other. Anthropology
turns another page in its history as self and other become redefined within a
framework of relations which is a reflection of a global framework of structural
interrelations. Old ideals of civilization and old boundaries of culture have
broken down or eroded in the historical streams of ethnic consciousness--human
interrelationships within an ethnic framework of understanding better reflect
the modern existential realities of human groupings within a global political
economy. The question which remains to be asked, is, what is upon the next page
of anthropological history. In its obsession with science, anthropology has
forgotten itself as a hermeneutic enterprise engaged in the reading of human
reality and in the understanding of humanity. As the boundaries of a bygone
cultural self rooted in a colonial background wear thin, so will the science
engineered to protect and reinforce these boundaries become more and more
superficial and anachronistic--in a real sense of phenomenological relevance and
existential importance, they will become vestigial indeed--disguising more than
revealing, obfuscating more then enlightening. We are upon an age of a new
'ethnical science' concerned with labels, stereotypes, classifications and
parameters of socio-economic wealth and poverty. This to shall wear away with
time. And then there will remain only the human self in relation to the human
other, and the need to explore the existential predicament of a common humanity.
Then there will be no important boundaries, no labels, no stereotypes. Only a
common citizenship in a common world, and the remaining need to achieve a common
human understanding.
******
THE END
URBAN DIMENSIONS OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NANYANG ETHNICITY
Southeast Asia's 'primate cities' are generally undergoing
rapid urbanization and development. They represent symbolically and materially
as well as existentially the focal center of Southeast Asian modernization,
westernization and 'secularization' of traditional religious values. They also
constitute the focal concern of Southeast Asian problems of social inequality,
economic poverty and crowding. Population densities skyrocket in urban
centers--making plainly visible to the average tourist the social diseases of
poverty, ignorance, exploitation which , though epidemic in these concentrated
and severely limited areas, are but the tip of an endemic iceberg which remain
hidden under the triple canopy of the tropical countryside. Squatter 'villages'
surround the periphery of these urban centers of national economic growth. If
one takes a train from a small agricultural town to a major urban settlement,
say Georgetown, and then on to Kuala Lumpur and to the final destination of
downtown Singapore, one will have taken a train to ride through history from a
pre-colonial setting to a 'post modern' synthetic paradise. As one travels the
rail gamut from rural to urban, the pace of living and dying picks up--the range
and availability of contemporary western manufactured commodities become
greater, as does the cost of living, the average per capita income, the screens
of opportunity of a better income. The city is the center of the global
marketplace--where modernization, development, 'civilization' is much more
evident. It is also the place where ethnic and political issues come into clear
focus and the future gets played out once and for all. At the gateway to the
city, there is no turning back.
The Chinese are a particularly important segment of any urban
setting--they are conspicuous and prominent in their habits of living up to
their common stereotype of 'cosmopolitanness' and business.
From small town to major metropolis in Southeast Asia,
'Chinese' will be found at its center 'minding their own business'. Whatever
their agricultural ties to the countryside and even though they may be found
carried wherever civilization may take them, Chinese never stray too far from
the 'city'. Not too surprisingly, their fate is the future of the SEA city. It
becomes important therefore to look in detail and depth at the character of
these 'Chinatowns' which span the gamut between rural and urban, small and large
and old and new. Like it or not, the fate of the Nanyang Chinese becomes played
out upon an urban stage.
What is the urban dimension of the political economy of
Nanyang ethnicity?…and what are its possible implications for modernization,
development, poverty, inequality and the process of 'civilization'?
******
TRADE DIMENSIONS OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NANYANG ETHNICITY
The Nanyang Connection of the overseas Chinese of Southeast
Asia is inextricably linked to their political economic success as a network of
merchants, traders, middlemen and entrepreneurs. Historically this network
expanded during the colonial period into an overseas, trans-national empire
which culminated in political reverberations in 'old China'. Now their moment of
monetary glory is waning--their moment in the marketplace of humankind as
ephemeral as any. Since the end of WW11 their economic co-prosperity and 'peace'
has been in decline in the face of burgeoning Nationalism, Nationalities and
National Elites. In many nations of SEA their future has become one of
ethnocide, genocide or enforced emigrations--their future has become as
precarious and problematic as their past. The old colonial elite was replaced by
a new nationalistic elite which is no longer sympathetic to the business and
organizational qualities of the 'synthesizing' Chinese 'mind'. Now they are seen
as either an obstacle to further progress as the Germans once saw the Jews, or
else they are relegated into a post colonial latifundrial context of being
merely the servants of development--as the White aristocrats viewed the Black
Nursemaid. In the meantime the old colonial masters have simply turned their
backs upon their plight, like they turned their backs upon all else 'colonial'
except profits--now is the age of neo-colonialism.
But with the overseas Chinese, business is always business and money is the
ritual religious guarantee of the success of future generations. Kong Xi Fai
Cai--Happy and Prosperous Chinese New Year to you. Business has become more
than a means to some capitalistic end--it has become a way of life. If the West
invented and developed the idea of capitalism, then they certainly stole it from
the original Chinese creation of business--'the state of being busy'. And
if it means in the final analysis that there remains a billion over miracle
mouths to feed and nurture in the Chinese idiom, then that has merely become the
economic side of the political coin of 'Chinese-ness'--Janus faced as it may
be--the simple rectification of names and the never ending 'mandate of Heaven'.
Meanwhile many more will be born and suffer and perish an untimely death. EAN--this
is fate.
What is the Chinese virtuosity of business, the knack of squeezing a dollar
out of fifteen cents which has made him/her a success and a threat throughout
Southeast Asia? What is the political economy of 'Chineseness' which spells both
paradise and doom in contemporary Southeast Asia. Southeast Asia has long been a
maritime region where trade and transaction ruled supreme--what is the measure
and method of Chinese political cultural adaptation to a Southeast Asian
environment? What is the merchant dimension of the political economy of Nanyang
ethnicity?
******
RURAL DIMENSIONS OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NANYANG ETHNICITY
Rubber and tin are Malaysia's leading export commodities.
Southeast Asian political economy remains basically latifundian--agrarian
inspite of the overemphasis of urban development. To find real, widespread
poverty in Southeast Asia, one must venture off the beaten tourist track and get
away from the short stops and hops of towns and cities--one must penetrate the
real countryside to discover what it really means to remain poor and destitute
in a multi-trillion dollar world economy. Unpleasant surprises await even the
average urbanite of Southeast Asia brave new cities, who naively thinks he/she
has seen it all.
The rural dimension is the other side of the coin of Chinese
ethnicity--even though the Chinese remains always primarily a cosmopolitan city
mouse, he always has connections with second country cousins who are hidden in
the woodwork. The Chinese merchant maintains often long reaching vested
interests in rural development. Indeed, they were historically the true pioneers
and frontiersmen of the agricultural colonial economic development of Southeast
Asia. The proud new National Bourgeoisie owe their debt of gratitude to their
Chinese 'brethren under the skin--yellow or brown'. The countryside was the
place where indigenous natives interacted with the global civilization via the
Chinese middleman who developed his own kind of monopoly upon the real edge of
modernity. This has been loosely referred to as the 'kongsi' or 'cheong tsu'.
The Chinese secretly gains his/her strength in numbers which can be
systematically well organized along many different lines--alone the Chinaman is
at the mercy of the elements, but among his own kind he can move mountains and
transact miracles, as long as there remains a profit of a bowl of broth in the
morning, a bowl of noodles in the say, and a bowl of rice at night (not to
mention a bowl of food to the spirits). "To classify a Chinese association
according to is name is always misleading." (T'ien; 1953: 19)
What is the role of agricultural enterprise in Chinese
ethnicity and what is the role of Chineseness in rural development--what is the
rural dimension of the political economy of Nanyang ethnicity?
******
SOCIO CULTURAL DIMENSIONS OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NANYANG
ETHNICITY
The Chinese 'kongsi' is given as the 'molecule' of Chinese
social structure, and yet the only operative definition of 'kongsi' I have found
is "a group of 2 or more unrelated persons of the same sex forming a
household". (Barrington Kaye; 1960) The 'kongsi' however ill defined, is
proffered by scholars as the 'secret' of Chinese organizational success in
business, no matter whether this business is conducted in the city or
countryside, on a plantation, mine, dock or shop, and yet the 'kongsi' itself
remains only a polythetically described name for many different 'things' which
have fallen under the stereotypical rubric of 'Chineseness'. My personal
experience has taught me that kongsi has many different often totally unrelated
realities, while it remains the 'basis' for the public 'Chinese Chamber of
Commerce' or the private 'Chinese secret society'. Somehow it has accreted the
quality of being automatic or somehow 'natural' in the ethnic Chinese
stereotype, a part of a characteristic Chinese instinct for social organization
like army ants.
And yet there remains something mysterious about the Chinese
social organization in overseas communities which defies explanation, typifying
what is stereotypically considered as characteristic 'Chineseness'. Ethnic group
identity gains its strength from within, reinforced for survival from within as
much or more than maintained negatively in structural political economic
relationships from without. Indeed the Chinese can be said to fit 'comfortably'
in a characteristic 'habitué' of being and doing which can be denoted loosely
by the term of kongis--yet such as structure leaves unexplained the
processes of time--historical contingency, human agency and circumstantial
agency in the ongoing rise and demise of kongis social organizations. Such
groups have a raison d'être which extend well beyond in time and place
personality predispositions or characteriological sets shared in common by the
individual members of such groupings. These groupings merge and function and
then disintegrate with time, while new such groupings take their place, never
exactly the same. The raison d'être is preeminently functional, practical,
purposeful and arbitrarily instituted as any that every happened upon the face
of the earth. The only thing natural about such organizations was their fictive
origins among individuals without screens of opportunity, vulnerable in an alien
environment, without makeshift family, strange and unfamiliar friends and
distant partners for relationship. Such organizations were grass roots and
sprung up in every suitable location which encourage the Chinese sojourner to
begin thinking about once again taking up roots.
What ate the socio-structural dimensions of the political
economy of Nanyang ethnicity?
******
ENTREPRENEURIAL DIMENSIONS OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NANYANG
ETHNICITY
Entrepreneurship and political economic leadership is
consistently downplayed as a critical factor in the make-up of Nanyang success.
Factors underlying entrepreneurial success of the overseas Chinese are given as
'cultural agents' or factors which serve to make them ethnically outstanding
vis-à-vis less entrepreneurially 'oriented' indigenes, this despite the fact
that as a whole the Chinese have never had a surfeited community leadership
which provided, historically and culturally, direction, sense of purpose as well
as 'orientation' and continuity. In other words, such 'orientation' was never
ever 'culturally given' or 'naturally innate' in the character of 'Chineseness'
but has always been willfully provided and promoted by key individuals usually
operating 'behind the scenes'.
Furthermore, ethnic comparisons of 'achievement motivation'
and the pulling factors of an established, ambitious elite, tend to obscure the
blatant class differences and tensions which exists as much within ethnic groups
as between different ethnic groups. It becomes the political economic advantage
of all elite leadership to promote an ethnic orientation which sustains their
own wealth and power--ethnicity then becomes a strategic smoke screen hiding the
inequality and class tensions behind political economic development.
Education remains the ticket for socio-economic mobility and
'success'--it remains the human oriented motor behind developmental 'progress'
of human civilization. Education and 'achievement motivation' must somehow be
positively correlated--a kind of mutual symbiosis between mind, matter and
spirit. It is small wonder overseas Chinese value education so highly--wherever
they may find themselves they are found to compete strongly with other ethnic
groups for success in education. And yet the interrelationships between
educational success, socio economic success, entrepreneurship, achievement
motivation and leadership have yet to be thoroughly or finally elucidated, no
matter how much they might be suggestive of some kind of causal determinacy.
What are the entrepreneurial, educational, leadership and
socio-economic variables underlying the political economy of Nanyang ethnicity?
A Marxist interpretation of class differences among the ethnic Chinese has yet
to be written, though it may prove enlightening in this regard.
******