Week 4- State making in Japan and India- Two Case Studies 1 .pptx

GPAD 2395
Comparative Asian
Politics
IV ONLINE LECTURE: State Making in
Japan and India: Two Case Studies
Dr. James F. Downes

• We need to take off our ‘Western lens’ when trying to understand China. In contrast
to European nation-states, China has a distinctively different viewpoint of the state.
The ‘West’ is losing its influence in the world ---> ‘A Chinese Century?’
(1) China: A ‘Civilization State’ and not a ‘Nation State’
Historically comprised of many different people’s + diversity
(2) The Notion of Race
Dominant Han Dynasty has emerged across ‘time’
Unique historical experience (homogeneity)
(3) ‘Chinese’ Conception of the State (unique + distinctive)
Europe: -ve conception of the state (freedom from)
Chinese view: (i) member of the family, the ‘patriarch’ of the family.
New kind of paradigm
(ii) Belief in the market + the state (private firms depend on
‘state patronage’ ---> Political Economy terms: ‘Quasi’ form
of Mercantilism (private firms/businesses are dependent on the
state’s patronage
Recap: Week 3 Online Lecture
Summary of Martin Jacques’ perspective:
Formation of the State

State-making/remaking:
(1) Political reforms are taking place
(2) China is embracing capitalism
(3) China is starting to abide by international norms and practices on military
and security matters ----> Paris Climate Change Agreement + The South
China Sea.
(4) Complexity of modern/21
st
century China
(5) Distinct nationalism and national identity in China (dominant Han ethnicity)
under President Xi Jinping ----> Anti-corruption drive (link to the
Selectorate Theory Model of Politics , see the work of De Mesquita et al,
2003; 2017)
Summary: Key Points (Week 3)

(1) Theoretical Approaches: Nation State Formation
(2) Japan: An ‘Official Nationalist’ Case Study
(3) India: A ’Multi-Pluralist’ Case Study
(4) Summary: Comparisons: ’Official Nationalism’ v. ‘Multi-
Pluralism’ + Economic Development
Today’s Lecture

(1) Past: Rich historical and cultural development
(2) Nation State Formation: Two ‘contrasts’
(3) Present: Economic development and ‘rise’ (21
st
century)
India and Japan- Why compare?

•
Sub-national groups/actors seek to separate from a
nation based on ethnic grounds
(1) Official Nationalism
(2) Plural Nationalism
(3) Ethno-Nationalism
•
See Kaya and Whiting (2015): “Ethno-National Separatism
in East Asia: The International Dimension” + Tonnesson +
Antolov (2000)
‘New’ Theoretical Approaches I

(1) Official Nationalism: When a state uses its bureaucracy to
establish and sustain the idea of a nation and a national homeland
through cultural practices, traditions and historical texts
Examples: Japan, Thailand and Malaysia
(2) Plural Nationalism: Refers to multi-ethnic, multi-religious or multi-
linguistic states that formed primarily where the inhabitants of a certain
territory seceded from a larger state or colonial power
Examples: Indonesia + the Philippines. The separation of
Singapore from Malaysia in 1965 (based on ethnic + religious
differences)
‘New’ Theoretical Approaches II

(3) Ethno Nationalism: The creation of a nation-state in the region
along ethnic or official lines involves an attempt at homogenizing