China’s “Century of Humiliation” Narrative and Selective Historical Inheritance
1. Overview of the Century of Humiliation Narrative
China’s official “Century of Humiliation” narrative (approximately 1840–1949) is a core historical discourse of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). It emphasizes invasions, colonialism, and unequal treaties imposed by Western powers and Japan, including:

• The Opium War (1840–1842) and the Treaty of Nanking (1842).
• The First Sino-Japanese War (1894–1895) and the Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895).
• The Japanese invasion of China (1931–1945) and the Nanjing Massacre (1937).
• This narrative aims to foster nationalism, legitimize the CCP as the leader in ending humiliation and achieving national rejuvenation, and rally ethnic sentiment to inspire the goal of “rejuvenation” while deflecting domestic social tensions. The CCP portrays 1949, the founding of the People’s Republic of China, as the turning point that ended this humiliation.

2. Characteristics of Selective Historical Memory
The Century of Humiliation narrative is a selectively constructed historical memory, highlighting specific events while deliberately ignoring or downplaying others that conflict with the official discourse or current political goals.
3. Selectively Ignored Historical Events

1. Russia’s Unequal Treaties:

• The Treaty of Aigun (1858) and the Treaty of Peking (1860) resulted in China’s loss of Outer Northeast (approximately 1 million km²) and Outer Northwest (approximately 440,000 km²).
• Despite Russia being one of the largest territorial aggressors against China, the CCP rarely mentions these events.

1. Ancient “Foreign” Invasions:

• The Mongol establishment of the Yuan Dynasty (13th–14th centuries): Conquest of the Central Plains involved large-scale wars and massacres (e.g., in Yangzhou and Chengdu).
• The Manchu establishment of the Qing Dynasty (17th century): Early Qing violence, such as the Yangzhou Massacre and Jiading Slaughter.
• Earlier events like the Five Barbarians’ Uprising (4th–5th centuries) and Liao-Jin invasions (10th–12th centuries).

1. Other “Absurd” Ignored Histories:

• Qing Dynasty’s external aggression and colonialism: E.g., Qianlong’s conquest of the Dzungars.
• The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom (1850–1864): Its anti-Manchu nature and religious ideology.
• Ming and Qing oppression of tributary states: E.g., demands for tribute and military interventions in Korea and Vietnam.
• The CCP’s early dependence on the Soviet Union: E.g., Soviet privileges in the Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual Assistance (1949).
• The Boxer Rebellion (1899–1901): Its xenophobic violence and superstitious elements.
• Ming Dynasty’s maritime ban policy: Restricting trade and causing economic stagnation.
• Qing cooperation with Britain and France to suppress the Taiping Rebellion.
• The CCP’s acquiescence to Outer Mongolia’s independence (1945).
• The CCP’s early advocacy of ethnic self-determination: Supporting independence for Tibet, Manchuria, and Mongolia.
• The 1969 Sino-Soviet border conflict: Labeling the Soviet Union as “social imperialism.”

4. Reasons for Selective Omission

1. Geopolitical Realities:

• Russia is a strategic ally against the West, and criticizing its historical aggression (e.g., Treaty of Aigun) or Soviet privileges could harm Sino-Russian relations.
• Highlighting historical oppression of Korea or Vietnam could strain current diplomatic ties.

1. Ideological Factors:

• The Soviet Union was the ideological model for the CCP, and downplaying its historical issues preserves the memory of the “socialist camp.”
• Acknowledging early dependence on the Soviets or the religious nature of the Taiping Rebellion conflicts with Marxist ideology.

1. Domestic Stability and Ethnic Unity:

• The CCP emphasizes a “unified multi-ethnic nation,” incorporating the Yuan and Qing Dynasties into “Chinese” history while avoiding portraying Mongols or Manchus as “invaders” to prevent ethnic tensions or territorial sensitivities in regions like Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang.
• The anti-Manchu nature of the Taiping Rebellion or the xenophobic violence of the Boxer Rebellion could undermine ethnic unity or China’s modern image.
• The CCP’s early support for ethnic self-determination contradicts its current anti-separatist stance.

1. Legitimacy and Nationalism:

• The CCP selects events that reinforce the “foreign aggression–CCP salvation” framework, ignoring Qing imperialism or tributary state oppression to maintain the “victim” narrative.
• Acknowledging the CCP’s role in Outer Mongolia’s independence or early self-determination advocacy could weaken territorial integrity claims.

1. Temporal Distance and Mobilization:

• Ancient events (e.g., Five Barbarians, Yuan/Qing conquests) are too distant to mobilize modern nationalism effectively.

1. International Image:

• Acknowledging Qing or Mongol imperialism could harm China’s “peaceful rise” image and be used against it in current territorial disputes.
• Highlighting the Boxer Rebellion’s xenophobic violence could undermine China’s modernized image.

5. Core Issue: Defining “Foreign Enemies”
The CCP incorporates conquest dynasties (Yuan, Qing) into “Chinese” history as part of a “grand unification” narrative, while defining modern Western powers and Japan as “foreign enemies.” This selectivity reflects strategic considerations in shaping a national identity and international positioning that benefits the current regime.
6. Case Study: Omission of Mongol Empire’s Conquests
The Mongol Empire’s 13th-century conquests (e.g., against Khwarazm, Baghdad, and Eastern Europe) involved massive massacres, with European records labeling Mongols as the “Scourge of God” or “Knights of Hell.” The CCP does not inherit this history because:

• Conflict with Victim Narrative: Acknowledging Mongol conquests would position “China” as a historical aggressor, contradicting the Century of Humiliation’s victimhood narrative.
• Ethnic Unity: Portraying Mongols as “invaders” could alienate the Mongol ethnic group and stir tensions in Inner Mongolia.
• International Image: Inheriting Mongol massacres could undermine China’s “peaceful rise” and invite criticism in current foreign policy debates.
• Logical Contradiction: Claiming the Yuan’s “unification” glory while rejecting its imperial sins reveals a “double standard” in historical inheritance.

7. Conclusion
The CCP’s Century of Humiliation narrative is a politically constructed historical framework designed to bolster nationalism and regime legitimacy. By omitting Russia’s unequal treaties, ancient invasions, Qing imperialism, the Taiping Rebellion’s ethnic nature, and other inconvenient truths, the CCP prioritizes geopolitical strategy, ideological consistency, domestic stability, and international image. This selectivity underscores that the narrative is not a mere recounting of facts but a strategic tool serving the regime’s current needs.

中國「百年屈辱」敘事與選擇性歷史繼承
一、百年屈辱敘事的概述
中國官方的「百年屈辱」敘事（約1840-1949年）是中共核心歷史論述，強調西方列強和日本的侵略、殖民與不平等條約，包括：

• 鴉片戰爭（1840-1842）與《南京條約》（1842）。
• 甲午戰爭（1894-1895）與《馬關條約》（1895）。
• 日本侵華戰爭（1931-1945）與南京大屠殺（1937）。
• 這一敘事旨在塑造民族主義情緒，強化中共作為「結束屈辱、實現民族復興」引領者的合法性，將1949年建國視為屈辱結束的轉捩點，凝聚民族情感，激發「復興」目標，同時轉移社會矛盾焦點。

二、選擇性歷史記憶的特徵
百年屈辱敘事是選擇性建構的歷史記憶，突出特定事件，忽略或淡化其他歷史事實，特別是那些與官方論述矛盾或不利於當前政治目標的事件。
三、被選擇性忽略的歷史事件

1. 俄羅斯的不平等條約：

• 《璦琿條約》（1858）、《北京條約》（1860），導致中國喪失外東北（約100萬平方公里）和外西北（約44萬平方公里）。
• 俄國是歷史上對中國割地最多的國家之一，但中共很少公開提及。

1. 古代「外族」入侵：

• 蒙古建立元朝（13-14世紀）：對中原的征服涉及大規模戰爭與屠殺（如揚州、成都）。
• 滿洲建立清朝（17世紀）：清初的揚州十日、嘉定三屠等暴力事件。
• 更早的五胡亂華（4-5世紀）、遼金入侵（10-12世紀）等。

1. 其他被忽略的「荒謬」歷史：

• 清朝的對外侵略與殖民：如乾隆對準噶爾的征服。
• 太平天國運動（1850-1864）：反滿族性質與宗教意識形態。
• 明清對朝鮮、越南的宗藩壓迫：如進貢要求與軍事干涉。
• 中共早期對蘇聯的依附：如《中蘇友好同盟互助條約》（1949）中的蘇聯特權。
• 義和團運動（1899-1901）：排外暴力與迷信面向。
• 明朝海禁政策：限制貿易導致經濟停滯。
• 清廷與英法合作鎮壓太平天國。
• 中共默許外蒙古獨立（1945）。
• 中共早期主張民族自決：支持西藏、滿洲、蒙古獨立。
• 1969年中蘇邊界衝突：稱蘇聯為「社會帝國主義」。

四、選擇性忽略的原因

1. 地緣政治現實：

• 俄羅斯是抗衡西方的戰略盟友，批判其歷史侵略（如《璦琿條約》）或蘇聯特權可能損害中俄關係。
• 強調對朝鮮、越南的歷史壓迫可能影響當前外交關係。

1. 意識形態因素：

• 蘇聯是中共意識形態的模板，淡化其歷史問題以維繫「社會主義陣營」記憶。
• 承認早期對蘇聯的依附或太平天國的宗教性質，與馬克思主義意識形態矛盾。

1. 內政穩定與民族團結：

• 中共強調「多民族統一國家」，將元朝、清朝納入「中國」歷史，避免將蒙古、滿族塑造成「侵略者」，以免激化民族矛盾或引發內蒙古、新疆等地區的領土敏感問題。
• 太平天國的反滿性質或義和團的排外暴力可能損害民族團結或現代化形象。
• 中共早期支持民族自決的立場與當前反分裂政策衝突。

1. 統治合法性與民族主義：

• 只選取能強化「外敵侵略-中共救國」框架的事件，忽略清朝的帝國主義行為或對藩屬國的壓迫，以維護「受害者」形象。
• 承認中共默許外蒙古獨立或早期民族自決主張，可能動搖領土完整論述。

1. 時間距離與動員力：

• 古代歷史（如五胡亂華、元清征服）距今太遠，缺乏現代民族主義動員力。

1. 國際形象：

• 承認清朝或蒙古帝國的侵略歷史可能損害「和平崛起」形象，或在領土爭議中被用作反駁。
• 強調義和團的排外暴力可能影響中國的現代化形象。

五、核心問題：何為「外敵」？
中共將元朝、清朝等征服王朝納入「中國」內部，視為「大一統」的一部分，而將近代西方和日本列強定義為「外敵」。這種選擇性反映了中共在歷史話語權上的戰略考量，旨在塑造有利於政權合法性和國際定位的民族認同。
六、案例：蒙古帝國遠征的忽略
蒙古帝國（13世紀）的遠征（如對花剌子模、巴格達、東歐的征服）涉及大規模屠殺，歐洲史料稱其為「上帝之鞭」或「地獄騎士」。中共不繼承這段歷史的原因：

• 與受害者敘事衝突：承認蒙古遠征等於將「中國」定位為歷史侵略者，與百年屈辱的受害者形象矛盾。
• 民族團結：避免將蒙古族塑造成「侵略者」，以免激化內蒙古地區的民族矛盾。
• 國際形象：繼承蒙古屠殺歷史可能損害「和平崛起」形象，並被用於質疑中國當前外交政策。
• 邏輯矛盾：繼承元朝的「大一統」榮光卻不承擔其侵略罪行，凸顯歷史選擇的「雙重標準」。

七、結論
中共的百年屈辱敘事是一種政治性歷史建構，通過選擇性繼承強化民族主義和統治合法性。忽略俄羅斯的不平等條約、古代外族入侵、清朝的帝國主義、太平天國的民族性質等，反映了地緣政治、意識形態、內政穩定和國際形象的綜合考量。這種選擇性表明歷史敘事並非純粹還原事實，而是服務於當前政權的戰略需要。

小額贊助支持本節目： https://open.firstory.me/user/clsviykrc013001vp31igc316
留言告訴我你對這一集的想法： https://open.firstory.me/user/clsviykrc013001vp31igc316/comments

"Sip&Talk": Casual talks on philosophy, news, AI, geopolitics, and tough topics to spark independent thinking and logic. Hosted by Sunny and Joe.
《Sip&Talk》：新聞、哲學、AI、地緣政治與艱難話題的輕鬆對談，喚起獨立思考與邏輯。由Sunny與Joe主持。

影音版：Youytube：Mickytolife
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzYNnXbdeL75PrERbRS3urQ
Podcast：Mickytolife
各大平台：Apple Podcast, Spotify,SoundOn,已上架

小額贊助支持Micky頻道～
https://open.firstory.me/join/clsviykrc013001vp31igc316

音質不夠好？歡迎廠商合作優質設備～
合作信箱:[email protected]

 ˙ 👉【加入MickyYoutube頻道會員按鈕】  
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzYNnXbdeL75PrERbRS3urQ/join?sub_confirmation=1
👉【免費訂閱MickyYoutube頻道按鈕】
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzYNnXbdeL75PrERbRS3urQ?sub_confirmation=1
Micky本人的日常品酒與人生雜談
+
EP↑《Sip&Talk》｜Sunny & Joe

Powered by Firstory Hosting