Impressed by China: Historical Amnesia Strikes Again

David Brooks, editorialist for The New York Times, reflects on invidualism and collectivism in light of the China Olympics. He is quite taken with the open ceremonies in Bejing that highlighted the harmony and collectivism of the Chinese people. He wonders if individualism, Western-style, will hold up globally and historically. Perhaps collectivism has something to offer that we miss. Brooks writes:

The opening ceremony in Beijing was a statement in that conversation. It was part of China’s assertion that development doesn’t come only through Western, liberal means, but also through Eastern and collective ones.

The ceremony drew from China’s long history, but surely the most striking features were the images of thousands of Chinese moving as one — drumming as one, dancing as one, sprinting on precise formations without ever stumbling or colliding. We’ve seen displays of mass conformity before, but this was collectivism of the present — a high-tech vision of the harmonious society performed in the context of China’s miraculous growth.

If Asia’s success reopens the debate between individualism and collectivism (which seemed closed after the cold war), then it’s unlikely that the forces of individualism will sweep the field or even gain an edge.

Brooks utterly ignores the totalitarian nature and history of the Chinese authorities. Collectivism means top-down uniformity and conformity to a Marxist-Maoist ideal. Mao, the great Murderer of the Twentieth Century, has not been renounced. Marxist allows for some economic freedom in order to gain power. This was true even under Lenin the USSR. However, it cannot allow for political and social liberty, which threatens its statism (political idolatry: see Ezekiel 28:1-10). China continues to squelch dissent, which includes persecuting the underground church, as Brother Yun dramatically narrates in The Heavenly Man. It reaches around the world through economic and political infiltration. This includes buying up as much valuable goods and land as possible in underdeveloped Africa. It supports genocide in Darfur, Sudan.

One should hark back to 1939 when the world was so impressed by another Olympics and another government. Remember Germany and its lavish displays of Aryan sensibilities. Consider this description of Hitler's Olympic spectacle, written by Jeffrey O. Segrave, writing for George Mason University's "History News Network":

From the very beginning of the project, Hitler recognized the political value of architecture as a vehicle to proselytize Nazi Socialism and he mandated that not only should the stadium be constructed entirely with German materials but that in appearance it must enhance the collective tribalism that would resurrect the majesty of the Volk. One of German fascism's first major architectural statements, the entire Wagnerian scale venue reflected the chauvinistic agenda of the Third Reich: statues and reliefs celebrated Aryan athletic youth, the Maifeld's four stone pylons were named after early Germanic tribes (Frisian, Franconian, Saxon, and Schwabian), and the Dietrich Eckart Amphitheater underscored Greco-German links--both real and imagined--to the new regime. Even the Olympic Village was laid out in the form of the map of Germany with the main dining hall representing the city of Berlin. On May 1st, 1939, Hitler appropriately employed the viewing stand at the Olympic Stadium for his May Day address during which he expounded upon his theory of "Lebensraum." On September 1st he put his theory into practice and invaded Poland.

"Study history. Study History"--Winston Churchill.