What do you think?
Rate this book
Harvard East Asian Monographs #322
Superstitious Regimes: Religion and the Politics of Chinese Modernity
We live in a world shaped by secularism―the separation of numinous power from political authority and religion from the political, social, and economic realms of public life. Not only has progress toward modernity often been equated with secularization, but when religion is admitted into modernity, it has been distinguished from superstition. That such ideas are continually contested does not undercut their extraordinary influence.
These divisions underpin this investigation of the role of religion in the construction of modernity and political power during the Nanjing Decade (1927–1937) of Nationalist rule in China. This book explores the modern recategorization of religious practices and people and examines how state power affected the religious lives and physical order of local communities. It also looks at how politicians conceived of their own ritual role in an era when authority was meant to derive from popular sovereignty. The claims of secular nationalism and mobilizational politics prompted the Nationalists to conceive of the world of religious association as a dangerous realm of “superstition” that would destroy the nation. This is the first “superstitious regime” of the book’s title. It also convinced them that national feeling and faith in the party-state would replace those ties―the second “superstitious regime.”
These divisions underpin this investigation of the role of religion in the construction of modernity and political power during the Nanjing Decade (1927–1937) of Nationalist rule in China. This book explores the modern recategorization of religious practices and people and examines how state power affected the religious lives and physical order of local communities. It also looks at how politicians conceived of their own ritual role in an era when authority was meant to derive from popular sovereignty. The claims of secular nationalism and mobilizational politics prompted the Nationalists to conceive of the world of religious association as a dangerous realm of “superstition” that would destroy the nation. This is the first “superstitious regime” of the book’s title. It also convinced them that national feeling and faith in the party-state would replace those ties―the second “superstitious regime.”
- GenresChina
450 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2010
1 person is currently reading
46 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
August 10, 2011
Top-notch scholarship; top-notch writing. I couldn't stop reading it once I openned it. I'm only half way through but I've decided to get my own copy. That way I can write comments on the margins and make it my own knowledge.
I have yet to compare it the Ashiwa's "making religion, making state" since I only skimmed Ashiwa's book. Nevertheless, Nedostup's key contribution to scholarships on modern China is the demonstration of KMT's replacing earlier religions with a religion of the party-state, which is pretty much what CCP is doing now. This religion of party-state is eclectic: KMT reinvented and incorporated Confucius, Yue Fei, Guandi, etc into its new pantheon--the Sun Yat-sen's secularist modern universe. Hence in this sense, CCP is the true inheritor of the KMT's policy on religion, medicine, social engineering, and party-state building with Mao's universe. In this sense, CCP policies is simply a copycat of KMT.
I have yet to compare it the Ashiwa's "making religion, making state" since I only skimmed Ashiwa's book. Nevertheless, Nedostup's key contribution to scholarships on modern China is the demonstration of KMT's replacing earlier religions with a religion of the party-state, which is pretty much what CCP is doing now. This religion of party-state is eclectic: KMT reinvented and incorporated Confucius, Yue Fei, Guandi, etc into its new pantheon--the Sun Yat-sen's secularist modern universe. Hence in this sense, CCP is the true inheritor of the KMT's policy on religion, medicine, social engineering, and party-state building with Mao's universe. In this sense, CCP policies is simply a copycat of KMT.
January 2, 2026
Very refreshing to see the radical secularism and its resistance in the Republican Era. The much stronger state capacity & party mobilization in Cultural Revolution some 40 years later led to a very different end, but good to read about that KMT-CCP continuity.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews