Reviewed by: Social Construction of National Reality: Taiwan, Tibet and Hong Kong by Fu-Lai Tony Yu and Diana S. Kwan Norbert Francis Fu-Lai Tony Yu and Diana S. Kwan. Social Construction of National Reality: Taiwan, Tibet and Hong Kong. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2020. 164 pp. $95.00 (cloth). The circumstances that Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong face stemming from the conflict between the governing party of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the movement of citizens for, or in defense of, democracy is the theme of Social Construction of National Reality. While the conflict has many moving parts, a guiding argument that the authors present is that it is not only unequal but also one-sided. Following the introduction, an interesting time-frame shapes the discussion: while for Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong the historical lens primarily focuses on the last 70 years, beginning in 1950, for China we begin with the first imperial dynasty over 2,200 years ago. The research report of Fu-Lai Tony Yu and Diana S. Kwan is an important contribution to this history. Future work will be able to encompass similar conditions encountered by populations that have been singled out for special treatment by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. Chapters 1 and 2 outline the theoretical approach that the authors adopted so as to delimit the scope of their study, an emphasis on the sense of belonging to a lineage or emerging nationality as separate from that of others and people’s awareness of this inclusion and separation. Within this framework, for which entities might the concept of self-determination apply? Chapter 3 traces the more than 2,000 years of final consolidation, beginning with the Qin dynasty, of the traditional concept of a “grand unified China” guided by a single supreme authority and the “Great Han Mentality” (28) that its educational system strives to imprint within each successive generation. After a period of relative opening, the current supreme (or paramount) leader, in particular following the 2018 abolition of term limits, has again consolidated this tradition. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 outline how the peripheral or “surrounding neighbors” (29) of Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong have resisted over the years the attempt imprint upon them acceptance of the “unified China” condition as defined today by the CCP. A critic of the framework that the authors propose in chapters 1 and 2—and apply to the specific problem of each region in chapters 3–6—may object that the factors of group identity and awareness (e.g., the degree to which Tibetans or Taiwanese also identify, if at all, as Chinese or to which residents of Hong Kong express a feeling of belonging to China) are secondary and that the estrangement from the center of a significant layer of the population follows from a more fundamental, material, source of conflict: the irreconcilable confrontation of one-party totalitarian rule and democratic governance/respect for pluralism (in one case among the three of juridically implemented contrast). Truth be told, the same objection occurred to this reviewer. Yu and Kwan might in fact agree with the observation, to then point out simply that the underlying fundamentals were not the object of investigation, being an aspect of the larger picture easily incorporated into a much longer book. A test of whether or not the authors’ framing leads to an erroneous intermediate analysis resides in the concluding chapter 7. In the conclusion, the three scenarios of conflict are brought together for a closer comparison that takes the objective conditions for achieving the alternative of self-determination as a starting point. The previous chapter on the antecedents of the Hong [End Page E-18] Kong democracy movement allows precisely for the most objective overall assessment because, as the authors make clear, in effect, none of the essential conditions apply to the Special Administrative Region. With a hypothetical pathway to political self-determination extending into the distant future (if ever it becomes a viable alternative), the prospects for the democratic movement in Hong Kong are then permanently and indelibly tied to its counterpart in...
Read full abstract