Search Results

Inventing “National Rice”: The National Goods Movement and the Issue of Rice Quality

in Gourmets in the Land of Famine: The Culture and Politics of Rice in Modern Canton

This chapter presents a description on the National Goods Movement and the issue of rice quality. The National Goods Movement offered the foreign-rice tax scheme a favorable social environment. ... More

This chapter presents a description on the National Goods Movement and the issue of rice quality. The National Goods Movement offered the foreign-rice tax scheme a favorable social environment. Together with the imposition of the foreign-rice tax, the National Goods Movement contributed nationwide attention to Canton. The Movement's most remarkable features were the development of a new vocabulary and new notions to define what was authentically Chinese. Encouraging nationalism via a new form of consumerism resonated well with the National Goods Movement. The centerpiece of the National Goods Movement was a massive boycott movement that targeted foreign goods that competed with their Chinese counterparts. It brought new political connotations to the eating of rice. The proponents of national rice both highlighted that national rice was higher in nutrition and called for patriotism.Less

The Chinese Medical Revolution and the National Medicine Movement

Sean Hsiang-lin Lei

in Neither Donkey nor Horse: Medicine in the Struggle over China's Modernity

Chapter 5 documents the key historic events that led to the rise of the National Medicine Movement. In March 1929, the National Board of Health unanimously passed a resolution to abolish the practice ... More

Chapter 5 documents the key historic events that led to the rise of the National Medicine Movement. In March 1929, the National Board of Health unanimously passed a resolution to abolish the practice of traditional Chinese medicine. In response, proponents of Chinese medicine held a massive public demonstration in Shanghai and, for the first time ever, organized themselves into a national federation. This mobilization gave birth to the National Medicine Movement, effectively starting what would become a decade-long collective struggle between two styles of medicine. Instead of resisting the state, however, the proponents of this movement developed the vision of a “national medicine” and actively struggled to create a closer alliance between Chinese medicine and the Nationalist state. As they fought for the new professional interests that had been created and sanctioned by the state, this Movement was dedicated to pursuing upward mobility for practitioners of Chinese medicine by way of the state.Less

Defending Dual Federalism: A Self-Defeating Act

Sotirios A. Barber

in Federalism and Subsidiarity: NOMOS LV

This chapter examines whether there is a case for dual federalism. It first considers the main ideas of Marshallian federalism and its defense by John Marshall in his opinion, McCulloch v. Maryland ... More

This chapter examines whether there is a case for dual federalism. It first considers the main ideas of Marshallian federalism and its defense by John Marshall in his opinion, McCulloch v. Maryland (1819). It then explains how the so-called logic of the forum affects traditional claims for dual federalism and goes on to discuss the issue of state sovereignty and the principle of subsidiarity as well as the dual federalist claim that states' rights exemptions from national power enhance liberty. It contends that defending dual federalism is a self-defeating act because it denies the existence of both a controlling national good, such as national prosperity or democracy, and an authoritative national judge. It argues that a defense of dual federalism would have to occur in a national forum, where it is impossible to defend it in the first place.Less

Defending Dual Federalism: A Bad Idea, But Not Self-Defeating

Michael Blake

in Federalism and Subsidiarity: NOMOS LV

This chapter responds to an article by Sotirios A. Barber, who argued that defending dual federalism is a self-defeating act because it denies the existence of both a controlling national good, such ... More

This chapter responds to an article by Sotirios A. Barber, who argued that defending dual federalism is a self-defeating act because it denies the existence of both a controlling national good, such as national prosperity or democracy, and an authoritative national judge. Barber anchors his case upon a particular view of what the function of a national forum must be and what it means to engage with that forum. While the chapter acknowledges that dual federalism is unattractive, it contends that its defects are at the level of substantive morality; those who defend it do not contradict themselves—they simply offer a less than attractive vision of the national community. The chapter claims that the debate over dual federalism cannot be decided by considerations of the logic of the forum, and that the failure of dual federalism cannot be situated within its performative logic.Less