The May Fourth Movement

THE HISTORY OF CHINA AND JAPAN

FAQs-

 Political and Cultural Background of May Fourth Movement.

 May Fourth was a struggle for nation’s rights along with a struggle against
Chinese Polity and society. Evaluate the statement in relation its significance and
nature.
 May Fourth inaugurated new age in Chinese society. Comment. (Significance &
Nature)
 Importance of May Fourth Movement in political and cultural life of China.
(Focus on Political and Cultural Causes + Significance and Impacts)
 Nature and Significance of MFM.
 Social, political and Intellectual aspects of MFM.
 MFM was a manifestation of Chinese nationalism. Comment. (Focus on Political
Causes + Nature)

Answer- Structure of the answer:

1. Start of the Movement- May 4th, 1919.

2. Background (Causes)
 Economic= WWII end- Chinese companies in crisis
 Social= Rise of new classes, civil war, new educated intelligentsia
 Political= Decline of Republic, Japanese Imperialism, role of KMT
 Cultural= New Culture Movement of 1917: vernacular literature, attack on CVS,
individual rights, intellectual leanings.
3. Significance
 Anti-imperialist
 Anti-warlord
 Huge mobilization
 Youth leadership
 New Western ideas
 Pan-Chinese
4. Long term Impacts
5. Nature (Historiography)
 Liberals- Chinese Renaissance
 Nationalist- by KMT, highlighted anti-imperial and anti-warlord aspects, rejected
new ideas
 Chinese Communist- Anti- imperialist and anti-feudal bourgeois democratic
revolution.
 Howard Scholars and Chow Tse Tsung- critique of Marxist view
6. Conclusion.
Answer-

1. Start of the Movement- May 4th, 1919.

On May 4th 1919, 3000 odd students of Peking University and other educational institutions staged a
protest at Peking, against the Treaty of Versailles which gave the former German held Chinese
province of Shantung to Japan after World War-I instead of returning it to China, as China was
hoping when it entered World War I on the Allied side. The students also protested the inertia of the
Beiyang Government in opposing this action and at the failure of Woodrow Wilson’s claims of
open diplomacy. The protest in Peking soon turned violent as proJapanese government officials were
attacked. The press and the moderate bourgeoisies (Chambers of commerce, professionals etc.) all
came out in support. Within weeks the movement spread through China, with students launching
boycott of Japanese goods, founding students unions and Tsai Yuan Pei (Chancellor of Peking
University) resigning in protest. By June, the Peking Government succumbed to Japanese pressure
to put an end to the protest and declared martial law in Peking, arresting 1,150 people between
June3-6th. Jean Chesneaux says now began the second phase of the movement- centred in Shangahi-
numerous merchants called for a general strike and 60,000 industrial workers (textile, tobacco etc)
went on strike. Soon many towns of South China were engulfed by merchant and worker strikes that
the Government on 12th June finally gave in by refusing to sign the Treaty of Versailles, releasing
the jailed students and dismissing three pro-Japanese ministers. Student protest and merchant-worker
strikes subsided, yet the boycott of Japanese goods lasted the summer.

Thus the movement emerged with its intellectual base amongst the students and new
culture intellectuals teachers and its emotional base amongst the industrialists, merchants and
workers. Historian Chow Tse Tsung highlighted the main characteristics of the May Fourth
movement- Led mainly by young students it emerged as an anti-imperialist campaign, advocating
modernization of China through intellectual and social reforms. It also aimed to reform China
internally and expel “traitors” from the government. Its leaders stressed Western ideas of
democracy and science while rejecting traditional Chinese ethics, literature, customs and rituals.
Foreign intellectual strands gained currency during this period-liberalism, socialism, anarchism,
utilitarianism, John Dewey’s pragmatism were all in vogue. Post 1919 the movement took a political
turn as Left Wing groups arose to overtake the Liberals.

Chow Tse Tsung warns that this seemingly short lived anti-imperialist movement was not
limited to the events of the May Fourth “Incident” as earliest views suggest. Participants gave a
varied chronology of the movement e.g. Hu Shih said it lasted from 1917 to 1923 spanning the New
Culture movement. Chinese Communist historian Ho Kahn Chih held is lasted from 19151923 i.e.
from the founding of the New Youth magazine till its conclusion. While historians Jean Chesneaux,
Chow Tse Tsung and John K Fairbank all agree that the May Fourth Movement started between 1915-
1917 with Japan’s Twenty One Demands, cannot be separated from the New Culture
Movement(1917) and lasted till around 1921-the founding of Chinese Communist Party.

2. Background (Causes)
While exploring the background of the May Fourth Movement various-economic, social, political
and cultural factors contributed to the movement. Amongst economic factors, Tsung says that, the
pressure of foreign commercial competition on the Chinese only ceased during World War I. During
war time, Chinese national industries, credit and banking systems grew rapidly. Yet as the war
ended, foreign completion resumed, plunging Chinese industry into acute crisis. This struggle for
economic survival, contributed to the contemporary rise in political and cultural activities and the
May Fourth movement, explaining the participation of industrialists and workers.

Amongst social factors from 1900 China witnessed a decline of traditional powerful groups
like the landlords and gentry and rise of new merchants, industrialists and urban workers. Between
1915-1922, China was plagued by civil war as various warlords controlled the country. This spelt
calamity for the rural economy and a number of landless peasants increasingly left their villages to
feed warlordism. One also saw the rise of a new western educated intelligentsia by 1900s. This
intelligentsia, inspired by Western ideals led restless people in the May Fourth period to “Save
China” from warlordism and the threat of imperialism.

The political background to the May Fourth movement according to historians Chesneaux
and Chow Tse Tsung was not just limited to the immediate political cause –Shantung question and
Japanese imperialism. Internally it was stimulated by the decline of the Republic under military
dictator Yuan Shikai and increasing warlordism. In the international sense it went back to Chinese
humiliation at the hands of Japan’s Twenty One Demands of 1915. In January 1915, Japanese
Minister to China- Hioki Eki presented President Yuan Shikai with the notorious Twenty One
Demands which asked for Japanese control over Manchuria, Mongolia, Shantung, South East
Chinese coast and Yangtze Valley. Apart from this other demands called for effective Japanese control
over China’s territories, administration and economy. Immediately the Demands led to a huge outcry
in the press. By 9th May 1915, the Chinese Government was forced to accept most demands. Upon
this people came out to mark May 9th as “Commemoration Day of National Humiliation”. The
demands had a twin impact- Firstly a new spirit of nationalism developed which was directed for
the first time against foreign aggression, with slogans like “Externally resist the Great Powers”.
This spirit was also the hallmark of the May Fourth Movement. Secondly a spirit of national unity
developed for now as political factions like the KMT rallied to support Yuan Shikai. The demands
also sparked off boycott of Japanese goods, a feature seen after May Fourth also.

Yet one of the most important impacts of the Twenty One Demands was the reaction of
Chinese students studying abroad and the growth of the New Culture Movement (1917). Chinese
students in Japan, USA and France, began analysing the fundamental problems facing
China and believed that Chinese civilization needed to undergo complete modernization along
Western lines- in spheres of philosophy, ethics and social theories which had never been attempted
before. Previously Chinese modernization had been limited to economy, law, political institutions
and science. Chinese students studied various intellectual doctrines such (as liberalism, socialism,
pragmatism etc). They returned to China in protest and initiated The New Culture Movement by
1917, the ideas of which laid the intellectual base for the students of May 4th and the leaders of
which led the students on May 4th.

The New Culture Movement led by foreign educated intellectuals like Huh Shih, Chen Tu
Hsiu and Tsai Yuan Pei, called for a rejection of traditional Chinese philosophy, Confucian codes,
ethics and literature in favour of a “new culture” along Western lines. Thus they championed the
ideas of individual human rights, national independence, social equality, democracy, liberalism
etc. Huh Shih and Chen Tu Hsiu also called for “literary revolution” by promoting vernacular
written language (pai-hua) in favour of Classical Chinese language. Hu also promoted popular
literature and ushered in a “poetic renaissance” freeing up poetry from Classical conventions.
Proponents of new culture set up numerous magazines such as New Youth (1915) set up by Chen Tu
Hsiu and New Tide set up by students of Peking University. Thus by May Fourth movement one saw
an explosion of student’s reviews and clubs. Magazines like ‘Emancipation and Reconstruction’ were
founded in Peking and Shanghai and the Xiang River Review (1919) was founded by Mao Tsetung.
Chesneaux says such magazines attacked Confusion family values of blind obedience and upheld
women’s rights etc. The banners and pamphlets of the May Fourth appeared in vernacular, so that
they could be understood by the common man. The emphasis on individual rights and national
independence, contributed to a sense of nationalism. Tsai Yuan Pei the Vice Chancellor of Peking
University played an important role in the New Culture movement and May Fourth movements. He
supported the new culture by inventing numerous professors with varying intellectual leanings to
come an lecture- Huh Shih who was influenced by John Dewey’s pragmatist lectured, Chen Tu Hsiu
who was influenced by ideas of democracy also lectured, Marxist co-founder of CCP- Li Ta Chao
was the head librarian at the University. In fact John Dewey and Bertrand Russell themselves
came and lectures. All this contributed to the intellectual cosmopolitanism and high student
participation in the May Fourth Movement. Teachers at the University and the Pei came out to lead
the May Fourth movement. This can also be linked to the political turn the movement took post
May 4th 1919, where Left Wing emerged strong.

3. Significance
Historians Jean Chesneaux and Chow Tse Tsung point out that the May Fourth movement was
highly significant for various reasons. Firstly it had a unique twin dimension-(a)It was clearly anti
imperialist as it attacked the meddling of the “Great Powers” in China and (b) It was also anti-
warlord and aimed to expel internal traitors who didn’t have the best interest of China at heart.
Secondly it differed from earlier reforms and especially the 1911 Revolution in many ways. As
compared to 1911 Revolution one saw (i)a greater mobilization of people with students, workers and
industrialists all coming out in support. (ii) One also saw a shift from intellectual elite base of
leaders to a more populist and youth base of leadership. (iii) Since the May Fourth movement was
deeply rooted in the new culture movement, one saw the first time totally rejection of all aspects of
Chinese civilization- including Confucianism, philosophy in favour of Western ideas like liberalism,
democracy and socialism. Earlier reform movements and 1911 had aimed to retain Chinese thought
and ethics, while reforming political and economic institutions along Western lines.(iv)Chesneaux
point out that the 1911 Revolution was a Southern regional movement in all effect, while the May
Fourth Movement emerged as pan-Chinese, covering all important urban centres across the country.

4. Long term Impacts

The May fourth movement also had various long term impacts as Chow Tse Tsung points out that
it led to the rise of student and labour movements, the reorganization of the Kuomintang, the
birth of the Chinese Communist party in 1921 and the growth of radical feminism. It also firmly
established vernacular literature and thus facilitated popular education. Yet one of the most
important long term legacies of the May Fourth movements was that it marked the start of the
contemporary era in China as it contributed to the birth of the Chinese Communist Party (1921).
Jean Chesneaux mentions that initially the movement was supported by Western nations, yet as it
progressed one saw the growth of socialist ideas and a withdrawal of this support. The intellectual
cosmopolitism, 1919-20 saw great debates between sympathizers of Marxism like Li Ta Chao and
pragmatists like Huh Shih, over whether the resolution of China’s problems lay in reform or complete
revolution. Debates on application of Western Socialism and industrialization emerged. One also saw
May Fourth as the starting point of the industrial proletariat’s political career. By 1921 the Chinese
Communist Party was founded by intellectuals who participated in the May Fourth movement. This
May Fourth generation including leaders like Mao Tsetung and Zhou Enlai all of whom led the CCP
for over half a century afterwards.

5. Nature (Historiography)
The nature of the Movement have been subject to various interpretations. Liberals such as Chen Tu
Hsiu, Hu Shih and Chiang Monlin at the time saw the movement as a “Chinese Renaissance”, as they
said like in the European Renaissance, the May Fourth movement saw the birth of a new literature in
vernacular and a championing of reason, freedom, emancipation of the individual and human rights.
Chinese Christians then viewed it as a “Christian Renaissance” while Liang Ch’i Chao called it a
“Chinese Reformation” as he said one saw the rise of Neo Buddhism. But historian Chow Tse Tsung
says these Liberal views all mistook the movement for a restoration or a rebirth of ancient Chinese
civilization, which it was far from.

The Kuomintang at the time presented nationalist view. The progressive liberal wings of the
KMT agreed with the Liberal interpretation. Yet the conservative wing’s view was best summed up
by Chiang Kai Shek’s the KMT leader. He applauded the nationalistic sentiments, anti-imperialism
and anti warlordism of the movement, but denounced its new thought and students movement
aspects, as he felt they blindly aped Western civilization and ideas. Similarly he critiqued the
Liberals and Communists for adopting Western ideologies and not paying due respect to traditional
Chinese civilization. The KMT led Nationalist Government in the 1930s, rejected the May Fourth’s
new literature and paihua and endorsed traditional Confucian values. This contributed to loss of
support from young Chinese intellectuals for the KMT.

The Chinese Communist Historians adopted Mao Zedong’s view of the movement.
According to Mao the May Fourth Movement was the start of an “anti-imperialist and antifeudal
bourgeois democratic revolution”. It was marked by a united front between the bourgeoisie,
proletariat and intelligentsia, with the intelligentsia leading it. Mao held that the 100 years between
1848(Opium War I) and 1948-49( Communist Revolution) was a period of bourgeois democracy and
that the May Fourth Movement marked a turning point between Old democracy(80 years
preceding May 4th, 1919) and New democracy (20 yrs post 1919) which it ushered in. It was a
turning point as now the guiding force of the bourgeoisie democratic revolution now came to include
the proletariat. For the first time the Chinese proletariat emerged as an independent political
force. He said it marked the birth of a new cultural thought in China- i.e. the birth of Communist
thought under the leadership of the CCP. Thus subsequent Chinese Communist historians view
1919 as a turning point between the modern and contemporary history of China.

This view of the May forth movement has been critiqued by Chow Tse Tsung as well as
Howard Scholars like Charlotte Furth and Lin Yu Sheng. Chow Tse Tsung says firstly people at
the time didn’t clearly perceive it as clearly anti feudal or anti-imperialist till 1920swhen the CCP
presented it as so. People saw it as a spontaneous movement to save China and awaken fellow
citizens. Secondly on one had Mao saw it as clearly led by the bourgeoisie which employed
capitalist methods and yet also called it part of a world proletarian revolution. This remark was highly
contradictory. Chow Tse Tsung and John K Fairbank saw the May Fourth movement essentially as
an intellectual revolution in which the theme of emancipation of the individual was predominant.

Howard Scholars critiqued the Marxist position that the movement was a turning point. They
saw the May Fourth movement as only one of many crucial points in Chinese history. Charlotte
Furth also critiqued the Marxists who saw the movement as initiating new features. She says the
introduction of Western ideas was not novel as earlier in the Self-Strengthening period men like Liang
Chi Chao and Kang Yuwei introduced such Western ideas. Lin Yu Sheng critiqued the Marxists who
saw the cultural iconoclasm of the period as novel. He says cultural iconoclasm of the May fourth
period had precedents in the 1911 Revolution. Similarly Merle Goldman says Huh Shih’s literary
reform had historical precedents as earlier formal Chinese was replaced by anglicised Chinese
language.

6. Conclusion.
In conclusion the May Fourth movement was a culmination of various sentiments and issues that
had been brewing in China for a while. Yet after it one saw the development of new political
interests. The movement’s politicization and influence of the new culture ultimately led to splitting of
intellectuals down a new fault line that developed due to the growth of Marxism and this was highly
significant for the subsequent development of China.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Tsung, Tse Chow; The May Fourth Movement: Intellectual Revolution in Modern China,
Stanford University Press-1960
2. Chesneaux, Jean; Barbier Le François; Bergere Claire Marie; China from the 1911
Revolution to Liberation; Pantheon Books, 1977.
3. Fairbank, J.K. ; The Cambridge History of China, Vol 12. Republican China-19121949;
Cambridge University Press, 2008.
4. Class notes.