Abstract

Some argue a powerful China will likely reestablish a Sinocentric tribute system in pursuit of hegemony in Asia. This line of argument, however, rests on misleading images of the Chinese empire while assuming hegemony is a product of a single agent and its activities. But, why do actors comply with, defy, or challenge hegemonic authority? I argue hegemony is not just an outcome of the material power of the preponderant state, but is constructed in interaction with other actors’ pursuit of domestic legitimation. The tribute system and Chinese hegemony in early modern East Asia were built on symbolic domination—Chinese views of how international politics should work determined what was socially acceptable and legitimate while regulating the range of choices other actors could make due to domestic consequences. It shows that crafty political leaders engaged in a form of symbolic politics that manipulated external recognition from the hegemon, but in ways that strengthened their positions against domestic opponents.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.