SUN WUKONG Stumbling towards
Confucius-ville By Wu Zhong,
China Editor
HONG KONG - The Chinese
People's Political Consultative Conference
(CPPCC), constitutionally the country's top
political advisory, is mainly composed of leaders
of the tiny non-communist political parties,
retired senior Communist Party and government
officials as well as public figures from various
social sectors. For a long time, it has been
regarded as a fine "political vase" particularly
under Mao Zedong, in that it would unanimously
endorse whatever was decided by the Communist
Party and its government.
With the
injection of new blood in recent years, more and
more CPPCC members are becoming outspoken and
critical of government policies and officials. In
recent years, the CPPCC annual sessions, which
normally convened at about the
same
time as
the annual sessions of the National People's
Congress (NPC), China's Parliament, have attracted
increasingly keen attention from domestic and
international media.
At the recently
concluded two-week CPPCC session, a heated debate
over a plan to construct a Chinese Cultural
Symbolic City in Confucius' hometown in northern
Shandong province has drawn wide public attention.
The teachings and sayings of thinker and social
philosopher Confucius (551-479 BCE) have had a
profound influence in China over the centuries.
On March 9, Sun Shuyi, chairman of the
CPPCC's Shandong provincial committee, proposed
that the state allocate funds from its budget to
finance the construction of the Chinese Cultural
Symbolic City, which is to cost at least 30
billion yuan (US$4.2 billion) according to
estimated budget in 2004. Like a stone thrown into
still water, his proposal sparked off fierce
controversy. Over 100 CPPCC members, including
Mao's grandson Mao Xinyu, immediately signed a
motion opposing the proposal. But Zhang Zhenchuan,
mayor of Shadong's Ji'ning city, where the
symbolic city is to be built, responded adamantly
that "it is alright to have different opinions,
but we will go ahead with the project anyway". His
response aroused more fierce criticism from the
public, with some media commentaries slamming him
as being "ultra-arrogant".
Zhang may have
ample reasons to be arrogant and adamant.
According to the official website of the project,
www.zhwhbzc.com, the endeavor is not only
supported by the Shandong provincial government
and given the green light by the National
Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), the
country's top economic planner, but also has the
blessing of top national leaders such as President
Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao.
According to the website, on March 22,
2004, Hu wrote his instruction on the report about
the project that "glorifying the fine traditional
culture of the Chinese nation is a great matter
with far-reaching historical significance". Two
days later, Wen wrote his instructions on the
report, though the website does not reveal the
details. The wording on the website, however,
strongly hints that the two leaders support the
project.
In the past, a project with such
staunch endorsements could never have been
questioned and criticized by CPPCC members. But
times have changed, and in fact the critics of the
project also have strong reasons.
First of
all, the name Chinese Cultural Symbolic City
suggests the place will be a symbol of Chinese
culture. Putting aside the question of whether
Chinese culture can be simply materialized in this
way, it is a matter to be decided by the whole
Chinese nation or their representatives, certainly
not by some government officials. At least the
CPPCC and NPC should have been consulted.
With a history of 5,000 years and vast
land area, it is difficult to say which place best
represents Chinese culture. True, Confucianism is
the core of Chinese culture and Ji'ning is the
hometown of Confucius. But all Chinese say they
are descendents of Emperor Yan and Emperor Huang.
Some may argue that their native places should
also be revered.
Secondly, despite the
go-ahead given by the NDRC, it is not a national
development project but a local one. As such, it
is the local government's responsibility to
finance it. To ask the state to fund it means to
upgrade it to a national project, which definitely
must be scrutinized by the NPC, which oversees the
central government budget. It is certainly
improper, if not dishonest, for Shandong to start
the project as a local investment and then ask the
state to finance it.
Moreover, the nature
of the project remains ambiguous. Is it a cultural
project, property development project, or a
construction of tourist facilities? Authorities
concerned owe the public a clear explanation.
It is no wonder the project has been
widely questioned and criticized by the public, in
addition to the CPPCC members. After Shandong
governor Jiang Daming officially unveiled the plan
for the symbolic city in Beijing at a press
conference hosted by the State Council's
Information Office on March 1, two days before the
CPPCC began to convene its annual session, Chinese
netizens rushed to post their opinions on
websites, with more of them opposing it than
supporting it. An opinion poll that day showed
more than 60% of participants were against the
project.
Responding to public opposition,
Gao Shuqun, a former Ji'ning government official
who initiated the idea of building the symbolic
city, told the media: "Our primary aim is not to
build houses or ritual architecture for
worshipping. We want to arouse our nation's
consciousness, through a materialized way, in
treasuring and protecting our national spirits."
Well spoken, but either Gao or the Ji'ning city
government has to explain how the 30 billion yuan
budget for the project has been calculated.
Given the information currently available,
people may reasonably suspect that Ji'ning city
simply wants to launch a huge development project
to improve local tourist facilities under the name
of cultural renaissance.
After dumping
orthodox Marxist and Maoist dogmas, the Chinese
Communist Party needs to find a new ideology for
the nation. In 1995, former president Jiang Zemin
called for looking for a "cultural link" between
the past and the present. Encouraged by the party,
the revival of traditional culture has become
fashionable. A number of scholars have made their
fortunes by publishing books or delivering public
speeches to popularize Confucianism and other
ancient doctrines.
To boost domestic
tourism as a way to help stimulate domestic
consumption, China began to introduce the
so-called "golden-week" system in 1999. Since 2000
until this year, Chinese people enjoy three
week-long holidays on the Lunar New Year, May 1
(Labor Day - which is canceled from this year) and
the October 1 National Day. To increase local
tourism, places without natural attractions or
scenic spots dug deeply into local histories in
order to reconstruct ancient architectural
structures such as city walls, temples, pagodas or
pavilions, in hope such man-made scenes could
attract visitors.
The proposed Chinese
Cultural Symbolic City would be located on Jiulong
(Nine Dragons) Hill between Qufu, Confucius'
hometown, and Zoucheng, the hometown of another
sage, Mengzi (Mencius). Both Qufu and Zoucheng are
under the jurisdiction of Ji'ning city. While
tourists to Shadong would visit Qufu, few would
also visit Menciu's hometown, though the two
places are just several kilometers away. Once the
symbolic city is built, the whole area would
become a big tourist spot with the goal of
tourists staying longer and spending more.
For a true cultural renaissance, China
needs to produce contemporary thinkers,
philosophers, artists, scientists and scholars
rather than to revamp walls, pagodas, pavilions,
temples or build projects like the Chinese
Cultural Symbolic City.
(Copyright 2008
Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and republishing .)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
