Week 7 Weekly Journal
Student’s name
Institutional Affiliation
The Political and Economic consequences of Nationalist Protest in China: The 2012 Anti-Japanese Demonstrations
The above article was written by Kevin Foley, Jeremy L. Wallace, and Jessica Chen Weiss, discussing the 2012 Anti- Japanese Demonstrations. The protests were caused by the fact that Japan wanted to purchase three islands in Senkaku/Diaoyu, and the Chinese people were in disagreement. Chinese citizens took to the streets to demonstrate that purchase. The demonstrations were termed as ‘Nationalist Protests’ because it was a way for the Chinese people to show their patriotism. China suffered economic and political losses due to the protests. Kevin Foley, Jeremy L. Wallace, and Chen relied on protest, biographical and economic data, that is, the datasets of 377 city-level anti-Japanese protests covered during the island crisis and the datasets of careers of local leaders (Primary Sources) to analyze the political and economic consequences of the protests in China. Systematic evaluation of cadres played a major role in their promotion. Leaders who tolerated political instability were less likely to get promotions over those who did not encourage political instability. Although the law did not tolerate political instability was not accepted in China, the early onset of the Nationalist protest saw several top leaders get away because they did not follow central government directives and promoted the protests.
The authors believe that cities with Anti- Japanese protests experienced lower Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and exports than the cities that did not. They relied on the measure of protest intensity in protest days as a primary source for this finding. However, some international scholars believe that the Anti-Japanese protests did not significantly affect FDI and international investment. They argued that there was not enough research to prove that theory, as the study was inconclusive. Scholars Davis and Meunier claim that they find no relationship between domestic tensions and international trade.
Everything under the Heavens: How the past helps shape China’s push for global power
In the book’s introduction, the author, Howard W. French, offers an in-depth look at the Chinese empire’s history and its evolution in its rule. Howard discusses how China saw itself as the central power, requiring bordering countries such as Central Asia, South East Asia, and East Asia. China was divided into two categories; civilization and non-civilization (Barbarians). China considered itself civilized because they accepted the Son of Heaven’s rule, and those who did not accept that rule were considered barbarians or invaders. China considered itself the central power and required every other country to recognize its legitimacy to receive legitimacy and an opportunity to interact with China. The Han emperor felt as though the Chinese power was far-reaching into the international borders, with influences all over different factions of the world. Even though the Chinese people saw their authority as the central power, they lost that power with the Western form of Global universality.
However, contrary to China’s belief that their superiority was a cultural DNA and that they were better than every nation, Howard did not believe it was true. Howard believed that China was overreaching its power and dominance. China had embedded into its people the feeling of cultural and technological superiority, which was dismantled in the Sino-Japanese War, that Japan won, and China lost control over a state they considered ‘inferior.’