Boxer Rebellion

Controversy in modern China

Cohen (1997) considers the ways in which the Boxer Rebellion has been mythologized within modern memories, pointing out not only the foundations for the myths but also those occasions when the myth had to be modified so as to fit in with changing intellectual, political, and cultural currents. He looks at mythologizing in the New Culture Movement from 1915 to 1925, which showed the Boxers as irrational and backward; in the anti-imperialist struggles of the 1920's, which depicted the Boxers as true patriots; and in the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, which insisted on a monolithic interpretation of the Boxers, not only stressing the Boxers' patriotic character but also drawing attention to the numbers of women associated with them.

Though the reaction of the Boxers against foreign imperialism in China is regarded by some as patriotic, the violence that they caused in committing acts of murder, robbery, vandalism and arson cannot be considered much different from the events of other rebellions in China, if not worse. Some people in China considered this movement as a rebellion (亂; disorder; Mandarin Pinyin: luàn), a negative term in Chinese language, when described by commentators during the years of the Qing dynasty and Republic of China. However, the Chinese Communists have shifted the perception of the rebellion by referring to it as an uprising (起義; being upright; qǐyì), a more positive term in the Chinese language. It is frequently referred to as a "patriotic movement" in the People's Republic of China by Communist politicians.

In January 2006, Freezing Point, a weekly supplement to the China Youth Daily newspaper, was closed partly due to its running of an essay by Yuan Weishi, a history professor at Zhongshan University, who claimed modern Chinese history textbooks were glossing over the atrocities committed by the Boxer rebels