HONG KONG RIOTS OF OCTOBER 1884
63
major factor in the affair. On October 24 the Hong Kong Chinese population was reported to have been very agitated by the appearance in the city of a man who claimed to have captured a French standard and was on his way to Canton to collect the reward being offered there for such items. The description of the stir he caused among the local population cannot but lead one to believe that a great deal of national pride was involved in the demonstration. National pride is one of the first signs of true nationalism.
One other piece of evidence may be cited along the same lines as the above incident. On August 29 the North China Herald reported great excitement among the Chinese population of Shanghai at the news of the battles at Foochow. The editor felt it necessary in commenting to state that he should withdraw everything he had ever said about the lack of public opinion or interest in political events among the Chinese. He, like his colleague in Hong Kong two months later, was trying to come to grips with the realization that the old ideas about the lack of national feeling among the Chinese were no longer valid.
How much of what happened in Hong Kong during September and October of 1884 can be traced to influences from the mainland, and how much was due to genuine national feeling among the Chinese population? We do know that one of the small number of Chinese banished under the Peace Preservation Ordinance was accused of being a paid agitator from Canton, but how many others like him were there and how much influence did they have? We also know that many of the strikers during the troubles claimed coercion from Canton in defense of their action, but in the general strike that followed they claimed to be striking for the right to boycott the French. Were they claiming coercion because they believed that that was what the Europeans wanted to believe?
Another aspect of this problem is the fact that we have here a very early example of the labor boycott and strike among a local Chinese population. Thus, in addition to the question of how much nationalism was involved in these events, we also have the question of how modern a labor movement was it? The demand for the right to boycott the French would seem to indicate some kind of developing labor consciousness which would gladden the heart of a Marxist historian if it could be proven true.
HONG KONG RIOTS OF OCTOBER 1884
63
major factor in the affair. On October 24 the Hong Kong Chinese population was reported to have been very agitated by the appear- ance in the city of a man who claimed to have captured a French standard and was on his way to Canton to collect the reward being offered there for such items. The description of the stir he caused among the local population cannot but lead one to believe that a great deal of national pride was involved in the demonstration. National pride is one of the first signs of true nationalism.
One other piece of evidence may be cited along the same lines as the above incident. On August 29 the North China Herald reported great excitement among the Chinese population of Shang- hai at the news of the battles at Foochow. The editor felt it neces- sary in commenting to state that he should withdraw everything he had ever said about the lack of public opinion or interest in political events among the Chinese. He, like his colleague in Hong Kong two months late, was trying to come to grips with the realization that the old ideas about the lack of national feeling among the Chinese were no longer valid.
How much of what happened in Hong Kong during September and October of 1884 can be traced to influences from the mainland, and how much was due to genuine national feeling among the Chinese population? We do know that one of the small number of Chinese banished under the Peace Preservation Ordinance was accused of being a paid agitator from Canton, but how many others like him were there and how much influence did they have? We also know that many of the strikers during the troubles claimed coercion from Canton in defense of their action, but in the general strike that followed they claimed to be striking for the right to boycott the French. Were they claiming coercion because they believed that that was what the Europeans wanted to believe?
Another aspect of this problem is the fact that we have here a very early example of the labor boycott and strike among a local Chinese population. Thus, in addition to the question of how much nationalism was involved in these events, we also have the question of how modern a labor movement was it? The demand for the right to boycott the French would seem to indicate some kind of deve- loping labor conciousness which would gladden the heart of a Mar- xist historian if it could be proven true.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.