China's Rise and the Chinese Overseas

Bernard Wong, Chee-Beng TAN

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351866606
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Anthropology
• Index: Social Sciences

Since the 1978 opening up of China and her active engagement in economic reformation and modernization, China has become a truly global economic power. These developments have, consequently, had an impact on ethnic Chinese people living across the world.

Traditionally, the study of immigrant communities has focused on internal factors, such as the leadership and social organization of the actors inside the communities. This book, however, turns attention to the exogenous factors, which have helped shape the lives of the Chinese diaspora. In doing so, it provides a valuable contribution to the recent literature, which focuses on the effect of globalisation on the Chinese overseas. Using a number of empirical case studies, including the San Francisco Bay, Canada, South Africa and Hungary, it provides an investigation into how China's contemporary position in the world has affected the identity of the various locales of the Chinese in different continents. Whilst demonstrating the implications of China's rise on patterns of circular migration and transnational movements, it also explores how the social and economic relations between Chinese communities and their host and ancestral countries have changed. Ultimately, it highlights how China's rise has brought new economic opportunities and political clout for the Chinese overseas, but at the same time, has created new stereotypes and racial images by association.

As an in-depth study of Chinese societies as well as current migration trends, this book will be useful for students of Chinese Studies, Ethnic Studies, Anthropology and Sociology.

1 The rise of China and its impact on the Chinese in the San Francisco Bay Area

Bernard P. Wong

Introduction

The formation of an ethnic group and its relationship with the larger society have been envisioned differently by social scientists of various schools of persuasions. Some have argued that the continuity of ethnicity is an artifact of the emergence of capitalism. Others believe that some ethnic groups have an inherent anti-assimilation tendency to the host society. Some insist that it is the enculturation process emphasizing one’s own ethnicity. Still others argue that it is the larger society or the encapsulating society that molds the assimilation process of the ethnic group. This chapter, while not denying that there are many forces or factors emanating from the larger society and from the ethnic groups, would like to show that the emergence of the country of emigration as a world power plays a pivotal role in shaping the ethnic culture and its interaction patterns with the larger society. Specifically, this chapter is interested in examining how the rise of China in the past three decades has affected the ethnic Chinese in San Francisco. This Chinese community is chosen to investigate the relationships between China and the Chinese-Americans for a variety of reasons. First, the San Francisco Chinese community is the oldest in the United States and it has a cross-section of the Chinese population of the USA in terms of age, sex and economic characteristics. Second, it is representative of the Chinese in the USA in terms of social organization and occupational structure. Third, the Chinese in this region comprise both the Chinatown-connected and the non-Chinatown population. Fourth, the trends set up by the Chinese immigrants are representative of the rest of America such as the formation of identity and their participation in the larger society.

A formal relationship between United States and the People’s Republic of China did not officially begin until 1979 after President Nixon’s visit to China. Although the Chinese Communist Party started ruling the Chinese mainland in 1949, the US government did not recognize China during the period between 1949 and 1979. During this period, the Chinese communities in the USA had only minimal contacts with China. The isolation was aggravated by the Korean War (1950–1953), when the USA and PRC were adversaries. Few Chinese-Americans were interested in having any deep contacts with the Chinese mainland during this period for fear of being labeled as traitors and being given possible “concentration camp” treatment similar to that imposed on Japanese-Americans in the 1940s. Contacts between the PRC and Chinese-Americans have been on the rise since the implementation of the modernization programs of Deng Xiaoping in the 1970s, and the influence of China on the Chinese-American communities has been felt more deeply since 1980. With the emergence of China as a global economic power in the past 30 years (1980–2016), many changes occurred in USA–China relations. However, the increased activities between Chinese-Americans and China do not necessarily imply that the Chinese in the Bay Area are more “sinicized” and less committed to the USA. On the contrary, the increased contacts with PRC make the Chinese in America keenly aware of their destiny. The Chinese in America have to decide where they belong. The relationship between the Chinese-American communities and the larger society is now a minority–majority relationship, as well as one in which an ethnic group is eager to participate in the resource distribution of American society. Instead of considering itself part of the Old Country, with political affinities with the ROC or the PRC, Chinese-American communities are developing closer ties with their host societies. Instead of isolating from city, state and federal governments, many Chinese-Americans are eager to participate in American politics. They want to be fully fledged members of the USA.

The main purpose of this chapter is to examine how the rise of China has played an important role in achieving changes in (1) the rise of sharp heterogeneity in terms of class and subethnic differences, (2) the formation and use of a variety of new ethnic identities, (3) rapid changes in the mindset of sojourning to establishing roots – from isolated enclave to interest group in a multicultural society, (4) changes in social structure from traditional associations to modern associations, and (5) development of the new transnationals.

Impacts on demographic and subethnic changes: not merely a Cantonese community anymore

Within the ethnic Chinese community in the San Francisco Bay Area, there have been many changes. Since 1980, China’s open-door policy has led to the relaxation of migration of Chinese to the USA. Not only has there been a large increase of Chinese immigrants to the USA, there has also been an increase of diversity among the Chinese immigrants in terms of dialects, occupations and localities of origins, political ideologies and social classes. This community houses the oldest Chinatown in the USA. In the past, it was a place for the old Chinese immigrants, predominantly Cantonese from Siyi (Four Counties) and Sanyi (Three Counties) in Guangdong. Their relatives later joined them and with their second- and third-generation offspring these Chinese have become the permanent settlers of the San Francisco Bay Area, which includes the City of San Francisco, East Bay, South Bay and North Bay. After the implementation of the 1965 Immigration Law, changes in the community started. The new law allowed the immigration of Chinese family members, their children, intellectuals, scholars, skillful workers and refugees to the USA.

Further changes occurred again after the 1980s. Of the arrivals, in addition to the family reunion visa holders, there are now highly skilled individuals in science, technology and the arts, investors and others. With the relaxation of emigration and the opening of China after the 1980s, more Chinese of different social backgrounds have been allowed to leave. Tourists, students, exchange scholars and even dissidents started to come to America. Now, in addition to members of Falungong and Tai Du (independent Taiwan), there are Zang Du (independent Tibet) and Gang Du (independent Hong Kong) people. Consequently, there is a great deal of heterogeneity among the Chinese in the Bay Area. Today, among the new Chinese immigrants, there are billionaires as well as paupers. In fact, 19 percent of them live under the poverty level (Hooper and Batalova 2015). Some have to pay high rents to live in crowded rooming houses, sharing a common kitchen and bathroom with total strangers. From interviewing social workers in San Francisco, it can be seen that there is an increase of new immigrants from China who have applied for welfare assistance in the past two decades. Issues like aging, housing, health care, childcare, elderly care and other social problems have multiplied.

The rise of China has enabled the entry of many Chinese wealthy elites, students and entrepreneurs. Some are purchasers of expensive homes and lucrative investment properties. They specifically target areas with good school districts and major universities with the hope that their children will be admitted to them. They seek to buy homes in Hillsborough, Stanford, Palo Alto, Milbrae and Belvedere, where many good schools are found and luxury homes are located.

Restaurants and retail businesses such as grocery stores, gift shops, rental properties and clothing stores are popular with the latest immigrants from China. Through investments in these businesses, they are able to obtain green cards (permanent residency). The Migration Policy Institute (MPI), in Washington, DC, reported that among the new Chinese immigrants the emigration of wealthy elites and students outpaced low-skilled workers (Xiang 2016). There are highly educated PhD holders as well as people who are lowly educated. The highly educated ones seek employment in the high-tech sector. The lowly educated ones work in the Chinatown area. Some were from urban China; others were from rural China. Among Chinese immigrants in 2013, 47 percent of them came to the USA after the 2000s (Hooper and Batalova 2015). Thus, more wealthy Chinese immigrants came to the USA during the ascent of China as a global power. Conspicuous consumption among some of the wealthy is noticeable. Some drive Mercedes, BMW, Ferrari, Maserati or Tesla. In the Bay Area, there is an erroneous perception that all the Chinese from Mainland China are rich. In reality, one out of five Chinese immigrants lives under the poverty line (Hooper and Batalova 2015).

There is also a geolinguistic change. Today, some speak Mandarin, others speak Cantonese, Taiwanese, Shanghainese, Sichuanese, Fujianese or Hakka. Chinese news is now broadcast in Cantonese and Mandarin. In the 1940s–1970s, the Chinese in the Bay Area spoke the Cantonese dialects of Siyi and Sanyi. From 1970s–1980s, the major dialect used in the Chinese community was the Cantonese used in Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Macao (Wong 1998). Since the 1980s, both Mandarin and Cantonese have been spoken everywhere. These include other Chinese neighborhoods such as Richmond, Irving Street, Noriega, Visitation Valley and Chinatowns (Oakland and San Francisco). However, in the high-tech area south of San Francisco, there are now more Mandarin speakers than Cantonese speakers.

Among the immigrants, there are geopolitical and cultural differences. Hong Kong Chinese speak Cantonese and have been influenced by Chinese culture and the British political system. Taiwan Chinese have been influenced by Western capitalism and Chinese culture. Mainland Chinese came from a country ruled by communists. Hence, there is multiculturalism among these three groups of Chinese. They may call themselves Chinese-Americans in dealing with outsiders and the larger society, but among themselves they may identify each other as Taiwan Chinese, Mainland Chinese-Americans, Hong Kong Chinese, old overseas Chinese (lao huaqiao), local-born Chinese (tusheng), new immigrants (xin yimin) and so on. However, this diversity within the community should not be interpreted as a “balkanization,” since there is a common culture shared by all Chinese. From interviews with the informants in San Francisco, the following is a sentiment shared by all my Chinese informants:

They like Chinese traditions and Chinese heritage. Their homes are decorated with Chinese arts, paintings and artifacts. The new immigrants like to send their children to Chinese schools during the weekend. My estimate is there are 10,000 Chinese kids attending the Chinese schools after the regular public schools to learn Chinese language, arts, painting, dance and music.

Michael Chang, who has been chair of the Asian American studies program at De Anza College since 1989, made a similar statement:

All the immigrant Chinese like to maintain Chinese culture in America. Some professional artists from Chinese mainland are invited here to teach Chinese music, dance, painting.… It is good because they are the experts doing why they know best. Parents also appreciate the talents of these people and send their children to learn from these experts.

(Wong 2006: 191)

Gone were the days where the luoye guigen (fallen leaves return to the root) thinking ideology prevailed. They were the sojourners. Today, it is the opposite. Here is the general saying among the Chinese immigrants: “When you settle down, you grow root [luodi shengen].” Occasionally, some mainland Chinese told me that they would like to have “US permanent ID cards or passports” first before they go back to China for employment or visit. This sentiment of growing roots in the USA explains why the Chinese in America are not eager to promote the interests of China. In fact, like other Chinese communities in the USA, the Chinese in San Francisco are more interested in participating in the politics of the USA. They consider themselves parts of the larger society. Most of the Chinese-Americans are more concerned with their social mobility, livelihood and well-being in America than with advancing the interest of their mother/ancestral country. The majority of the Chinese-American organizations and Chinese-Americans are reluctant to play the role of “public diplomats” (gonggong waijiao) of China. For many Chinese-Americans, the USA rather than China is their true home. They made a distinction between “politics” and “culture.” They are proud of their “cultural heritage.” Since they have deliberately made a choice to be citizens of the United States, they are no longer interested in participating in the political affairs of other foreign countries.

Impact of the PRC overseas Chinese policy on the Chinese in the San Francisco Bay Area

Polarization of political orientations in the Bay Area Chinese community is quite noticeable. Even for the two major local Chinese newspapers (Sing Dao Daily and the World Journal), they do not share the same political ideology toward China. One is pro-Taiwan and the other is pro-PRC. There is a large PRC consulate. The Republic of China is represented in the Bay Area by the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office. The Taiwan government and the mainland Chinese government do not always agree with each other on many issues. Squabbles and disagreements between the two still exist and in certain areas are noncompromising. Thus, for instance, Taiwan has been interested in the purchase of military hardware and technology from the USA over the protest of China. Some Chinese-Americans are for the US sale of weaponry to Taiwan; others are against it.

There are disagreements on cultural issues, too. In Chinese schools in the San Francisco Bay Area, there have been some heated debates on the use of textbooks issued by the Overseas Chinese Commission of the Republic of China in Taiwan. Some thought that the contents and information about the Chinese Communist Party, the Nationalist Party and current events are not “objective” enough. In terms of the use of the phonetic systems, PRC has a standard pingyin system to indicate the sounds of the Chinese characters in Mandarin. But Taiwan prefers to use the Taiwanese style general pingyin system, which transliterates the local dialect as well as Mandarin. Further, the PRC has been using simplified Chinese characters, to the use of which Taiwan is vehemently opposed. The latter accuses the former of destroying Chinese cultural heritage.

Taiwan and the PRC may involve the local Chinese to participate in their disputes or disagreements. Their antagonism with each other at times creates uncomfortable feelings among the Chinese in the Bay Area. Thus, for instance, in public activities, such as the Joint Athletic Meet of the Chinese, there is an agreement among all the Chinese-Americans participants: “Do not talk politics!” In the area of citizenship, Taiwan and China have two different policies. Since 1957, with the exception of the period of the Cultural Revolution in 1966–1976, Beijing’s policies toward overseas Chinese (including Chinese-Americans) have been relatively consistent (Fitzgerald 1972). The PRC’s policies toward overseas Chinese differ significantly from those of the ROC (Republic of China, i.e., Taiwan). While the Taiwan government still considers overseas Chinese to be citizens of the Republic of China and prefers to maintain that relationship, the PRC began as early as 1954 to encourage overseas Chinese to respect the local customs and abide by the laws and, if possible, become citizens of their countries of residence (Wong 1986; Fitzgerald 1972). In 1954, Premier Chou En-lai pointed out the differences between the PRC and the ROC concerning the problem of nationality:

For our past, we are willing to urge the overseas Chinese to respect the laws of the local governments and local social customs. It is worth pointing that in the past, reactionary Chinese governments never had any attempt to solve the problem of overseas Chinese nationality. This not only placed the overseas Chinese in a difficult position, but was often the cause of discord between China and the countries of residence. In order to improve this situation, we are prepared to solve this problem, beginning with those Southeast Asian countries with which we have diplomatic relations.

(Chou En-lai, Report to the First Session of the First National People’s
Congress, September 23, 1954)

In 1957, the Chinese Communist Party explicitly advocated that overseas Chinese should acquire nationality in their countries of residence. The following joint statement was made in the Fifth Session of the First National People’s Congress, spelling out the stand of the PRC on the matter of nationality (Fitzgerald 1972):

The broad masses of overseas Chinese residents abroad must now put aside any reservation, and on the principle of free choice, choose local nationality. The must live and work in peace in the countries of residence, actively cooperate and coexist with the local people, and strive for the peace, happiness, and prosperity, of the countries in which they live. This will be of assistance in promoting friendly relations between China and the countries of residence.

(Kuang-tung Ch’iao-po, May 1, 1958)

This policy of encouraging overseas Chinese to acquire local citizenship and participate actively in the social life of the country of residence differs significantly from that of the Taiwan government, which claims the overseas Chinese as nationals of the Republic of China (Wong 1986). Currently, the ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Notes on contributors
• Introduction: contemporary China’s rise and the Chinese overseas
• 1 The rise of China and its impact on the Chinese in the San Francisco Bay Area
• 2 From Cold War to open door: the making of the Chinese community in Canada
• 3 From multicultural ethnic migrants to the new players of China’s public diplomacy
• 4 Rising China and the history of the South African Chinese
• 5 Cultural ties and states’ interests: Malaysian Chinese and China’s rise
• 6 Rethinking “pauk-phaw”: Chinese migrants, ethnic interaction and China’s rise
• 7 Loving the money but not the migrants: Hungarian attitudes toward the Chinese
• 8 China in Cuba in the shadow of normalization of US–Cuba relations: observations on the ground in Havana
• 9 Ethnically diverse diasporas and migrations from China to Central Asia in the twenty-first century: origin and contemporary challenges with special reference to Kazakhstan
• 10 China’s new global position: changing policies toward the Chinese diaspora in the twenty-first century
• Index