Further thoughts on “Karl Who?”

Yesterday’s post discussed the possibility of the PRC as the world’s first mature fascist state. I received a number of comments, including this from Adam Supernant in our Shenzhen office:

I wouldn’t call China fascist (fascists were xenophobes; there’s not much of a racial superiority kick in China) but it’s also not Communist…I think the political title they gave to KMT China – “paternal autocracy” – is my favorite term.

There’s some food for thought: how similar China today is to the KMT-ruled state of the 1930s and 40s. That’s the first thing I thought when I heard about the gang busts in Chongqing last month. A tenuous connection, but I’m a big fan of KMT history so I’ll see connections anywhere.

There is a strong current of (Han) Chinese “exceptionalism” in Chinese culture, which makes a sound parallel to the nationalist xenophobia characteristic in fascist systems. It is interesting though that I’ve felt this in Taiwan more so than the PRC, which makes Adam’s KMT thought even more intriguing.

In either case, “communist” is no longer an accurate label.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *