What are the aspects of cultural awareness?

This paper attempts to seek a new understanding of "China tradition" from the local society rather than from the works of "thinkers". This paper holds that the traditional rural society in China is neither a bipolar society with severely divided tenancy system, nor a cohesive society with small harmonious autonomy, but a "pseudo-individualism" society based on large * * *. Compared with other civilized traditional societies, the traditional rural society in China is small. However, this is not because of the developed personality, but because of the androgyny of the big * * *. It is connected with the tradition of Legalists or Confucianists, and forms a series of "pseudo-modernization" phenomena. At the beginning of modernization, the traditional western society, which is based on the isomorphism of small * * *, has gone through the stage of "alliance between citizens and kingship", while China's modernization may be based on the isomorphism alliance between citizens and small * * *.

Query on Xiao's "Isomorphism Standard Theory"

At present, there are two popular theories to explain the traditional China society, especially the traditional rural society regarded as the root of China culture. One is the "tenancy determinism" supported by ideology in the past few decades, which regards the traditional countryside as a bipolar society of landlords and tenants determined by the land tenancy relationship. Land concentration and the opposition between landlords and tenants are regarded as the basis of all rural social relations and even the relationship between rural society and the state, and class contradiction has become the fundamental concept to explain the history of China.

The author once pointed out (Qin Hui,, 1996) that there are serious problems in this interpretation mode. Another interpretation mode that we can call "the theory of local harmony" was the enemy of "the determinism of tenancy relationship" before 1949, but it disappeared in mainland China for decades due to non-academic reasons. After the reform, it can be revived on the basis of inheriting the academic system before 1949 and introducing theories from outside (Hong Kong, Taiwan and overseas sinology). But interestingly, at this time, it no longer regards "tenancy determinism" as the opponent of argument, but becomes the ideological weapon for people from "neo-conservatism" to "post-modernism" to refuse "westernization". This explanation attaches great importance to traditional villages. Among them, interpersonal relationship is warm and harmonious. Under this warm bond, Xiao * * * has a high degree of autonomy, and the power of state power only extends to the county level. Traditional villages below the county level only rely on customary law and ethics to coordinate, and the state rarely intervenes. Traditional villages are considered to be family-oriented (so it is different from the "western tradition" which is individual-oriented). Confucianism is a reflection of this reality, and it takes "home" as the principle. Realized the integration of family and country, etiquette and law, monarch and father, loyalty and filial piety. Therefore, Confucianism is regarded as "China culture", that is, the embodiment of China people's way of thinking and behavior rules, and its theory of good nature, enlightenment, sage politics and ethical centralism are regarded as the source of China's characteristics.

From this explanation, there are various extensions: some people see that China's "small government and big society" and China's tradition are more "free" than the west (Hong Sheng, 1996). Others, on the other hand, see from China's "collectivism" that overcoming the disadvantages of "western modernity". It is also expected that Reconstruction of Native China will lead mankind into the post-modern scene (Gan Yang, 1994). Some people take the image of "Mountain Ye Gang" created according to this small homomorphic ethical autonomy theory as an argument to prove that "Western" rule of law is not applicable to China, and our social order can only rely on the ethical authority cultivated by "local cultural resources" (Zhu Suli, 1998). Some people use "rural tradition" to explain the people's commune, and think that "gentle natural village" is the key to the long-term continuation of China tradition. The people's commune system embodies the efforts to break through this tradition and move towards "modernization", and of course it has paid a "price". However, the "big commune" of 1958 destroyed the "village" excessively, which led to disaster. Later, the "team standard" gave in to the "village tradition", which made the commune run normally for 20 years (Zhang Letian, 1998).

In a word, it is the common point of these views to emphasize the autonomy and harmony of small * * * bodies such as villages and clans (relative to the intervention of the state) and regard them as the characteristics of Chinese civilization different from "different cultures".

It should be said that the revival of this "small * * * traditional view of the same body" is very reasonable. First of all, compared with the rural system after 1949, the traditional state power in China is indeed much weaker in controlling the life of rural communities; And with

The late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China, which were intensively investigated by small isomorphists, were eschatological and troubled times compared with the prosperous times of dynasties in history, and the state's control ability on grassroots society may not reach the level of prosperous times. Secondly, it is not impossible to talk about the small * * * isomorphic cohesion of villages and families in an abstract way. It is conceivable that people in any era rely on their own groups. Compared with the "class-only relationship theory" before the reform,

However, in the sense of cultural morphology theory, it is questionable to regard the traditional China's "small * * * identification standard" as the characteristic of China which is different from other cultures, and take it as the main basis for explaining history and reality. First of all, the theory of rural harmony can't explain the most prominent phenomenon in China's history, that is, the periodic super-large-scale social conflict called "rural war" in the past, because if there is conflict in traditional rural areas, to say the least, even if there is tension in rural internal relations, if it is really community autonomy and state power can't intervene, how can the explosion break through the scope of communities and occur at the national level? What's more, the social explosion in the history of China usually did not occur in the community and then spread outward, but broke out between the "state" and "civil society" at the beginning and then penetrated into the community. The yellow turban insurrectionary in Han Dynasty "from the same day on the 36th" is typical.