For myself, China has always been one of the countries I have longed to visit. In addition to holding such a unique and different culture than any I have experienced in my travels, there is also a great history possessed in the rural way of life, the natural surroundings of great rivers and hidden mountain valleys. From temples perched on hillsides to the towns bordering the sea, China, since I was little has been calling me. Perhaps part of the calling is the fact that it is far away, hard to get to in an inexpensive fashion, and ethereal in the sense that you can never really know what its like until you get there. Yet, over the past few decades, that calling has slowly been diminishing. Now I know that only so much can be garnered from the news, but with such large projects seemingly aimed at modernization and growth, their history seems to be getting left behind and in some ways, obliterated. Why would I want to go visit a country that is quickly becoming filled with smog? Trust me, its not just the smog, but also the eradication of natural vistas and landmarks that have for a long time, held my imagination and curiosity. One of the first projects undertaken by China that I vehemently opposed was the building of the dam blocking the Yangtze River. Yes, it is producing an incredible amount of electricity naturally versus their mostly coal driven power plants, but at what cost to the land and its inhabitants. Vast amounts of people had to be relocated from their towns due to the inevitable rise of the water behind the dam. Temples, if not moved, disappeared beneath the water, and the towns built for the relocation of the people are incredibly stark, unimaginative, and bleak. Uniform towers, indicative of the communist vision that permeates the nation, seek to homogenize all individuals rather than celebrate the uniqueness that each small town and its inhabitants hold dear. There is the incessant pollution of rivers and land that I abhor and now, there is a plan to move 250 million rural dwellers into urban populations. This is not fiction, it is fact, and the whole reason behind it is to drive the economy upwards, to create a society that is one of consumers versus one of farmers who live off the land. Will it be "easier" for many people? Perhaps in the sense that they won't have to work in the fields, but the cost is much greater than simply relocating millions of people to high rise apartment towers. In the relocation process, the towns that these people once lived in are being razed and little of the history that once permeated the countryside is being erased.
Rather than let urbanization take an organic course, China is seeking to move this many people within a decade. There are claims that they are being reimbursed for their land, but not all of them are being compensated appropriately. This course has been tried by other nations, Brazil and Mexico among them, and the result as been an increase in slums and destitute individuals rather than a consumer population. My biggest issue with this new program being rolled out by China is that history is literally being wiped off the face of the earth and the new "cities" they are being relocated to are bleak and boring. If you look at pictures of the new apartment towers being built for these individuals, they are all the same, row and row of 20+ story high rises that people will cram into and live a completely different life than they were used to. All this in the name of growing the economy and becoming one that is based more on internal consumption rather than exports. I personally don't agree with it. If you look at the United States for instance, people aren't forced to move to cities and the cities they move to are mostly unique places that offer vastly different opportunities and have differing architecture to boot. I have nothing against an urban life, but an urban life that is forced and with architecture that is bland, uniform, and repetitive is not progress, it is homogenization at its best. If anyone is familiar with New York City, there is a section outside of the city (the name escapes me at the moment) that is filled with tower after uniform tower of apartments, all crammed together and filled with people, close to a million of them. This one "city" as I will call it is incredibly similar to almost every "new" city being constructed in China for the relocation of its rural inhabitants. To thrust people from a rural life into an urban one is not the way to grow the economy. Well, it might be, but at what cost to the people and the history of a country, especially when old towns are being razed for factories and newer farms.
Even if you look at Europe and their old cities that have been around for hundreds of years, they all have a unique character that speaks to history, is possessed with it, and permeates it with the individuals that live there. These "new" cities in China have no chance of building a history other than one of communism and conformity. Europe didn't go through and raze all the old towns that people once lived in to make way for modernity, they left them and the inhabitants who still lived there. In part, this is because those residents who still live in the small towns chose not to move the cities and take part in an urban life. In China, they have no choice, its either move or have no place to live, there are no options. I know that for many people, this doesn't matter, but history should matter to everyone. Regardless of where we live, history is what builds a nations character and the individuals who live in it. If the United States were to bulldoze all small towns to build factories and new collectivized farms, we would probably start another revolution (perhaps). Yet in China, its a way of life for them. They are molding their history to what they need in the present and the past will all but be forgotten. By the time I actually get around to visiting China, the only landmark that might be left will be the Great Wall, and even that might disappear in time due to the efforts of the government to force progress upon the people. I feel for the people in China and would not want that happening to me. I am sure that there will still be some pockets of old towns and some history left in the rural landscapes, but it will be increasingly harder and harder to find and in time, they will become tourist attractions rather than true and honest villages and history that we can experience on our own. So at what price does China seek to thrust themselves into the modern age? They are already here, but they want more and more and more, and I fear that they will crash. Only time will tell, but their historic landmarks and rural villages won't be around to see the crash, only the inhabitants living in their "new" stark, modern, apartments will. Do they feel as sad as I feel for them? I don't know, but I know that if China continues on their present course, I probably won't ever want to visit.
Rather than let urbanization take an organic course, China is seeking to move this many people within a decade. There are claims that they are being reimbursed for their land, but not all of them are being compensated appropriately. This course has been tried by other nations, Brazil and Mexico among them, and the result as been an increase in slums and destitute individuals rather than a consumer population. My biggest issue with this new program being rolled out by China is that history is literally being wiped off the face of the earth and the new "cities" they are being relocated to are bleak and boring. If you look at pictures of the new apartment towers being built for these individuals, they are all the same, row and row of 20+ story high rises that people will cram into and live a completely different life than they were used to. All this in the name of growing the economy and becoming one that is based more on internal consumption rather than exports. I personally don't agree with it. If you look at the United States for instance, people aren't forced to move to cities and the cities they move to are mostly unique places that offer vastly different opportunities and have differing architecture to boot. I have nothing against an urban life, but an urban life that is forced and with architecture that is bland, uniform, and repetitive is not progress, it is homogenization at its best. If anyone is familiar with New York City, there is a section outside of the city (the name escapes me at the moment) that is filled with tower after uniform tower of apartments, all crammed together and filled with people, close to a million of them. This one "city" as I will call it is incredibly similar to almost every "new" city being constructed in China for the relocation of its rural inhabitants. To thrust people from a rural life into an urban one is not the way to grow the economy. Well, it might be, but at what cost to the people and the history of a country, especially when old towns are being razed for factories and newer farms.
Even if you look at Europe and their old cities that have been around for hundreds of years, they all have a unique character that speaks to history, is possessed with it, and permeates it with the individuals that live there. These "new" cities in China have no chance of building a history other than one of communism and conformity. Europe didn't go through and raze all the old towns that people once lived in to make way for modernity, they left them and the inhabitants who still lived there. In part, this is because those residents who still live in the small towns chose not to move the cities and take part in an urban life. In China, they have no choice, its either move or have no place to live, there are no options. I know that for many people, this doesn't matter, but history should matter to everyone. Regardless of where we live, history is what builds a nations character and the individuals who live in it. If the United States were to bulldoze all small towns to build factories and new collectivized farms, we would probably start another revolution (perhaps). Yet in China, its a way of life for them. They are molding their history to what they need in the present and the past will all but be forgotten. By the time I actually get around to visiting China, the only landmark that might be left will be the Great Wall, and even that might disappear in time due to the efforts of the government to force progress upon the people. I feel for the people in China and would not want that happening to me. I am sure that there will still be some pockets of old towns and some history left in the rural landscapes, but it will be increasingly harder and harder to find and in time, they will become tourist attractions rather than true and honest villages and history that we can experience on our own. So at what price does China seek to thrust themselves into the modern age? They are already here, but they want more and more and more, and I fear that they will crash. Only time will tell, but their historic landmarks and rural villages won't be around to see the crash, only the inhabitants living in their "new" stark, modern, apartments will. Do they feel as sad as I feel for them? I don't know, but I know that if China continues on their present course, I probably won't ever want to visit.
No comments:
Post a Comment