comparative value priorities of chinese and new zealand

multiple levels of analysis so that variability attributable to individuals, regions, or other
subcultures may be taken into account before we address nation-level variance.
Peterson (2009) notes some researchers strongly advocate the analysis of within-nation
subcultures, using regions for explaining variance in the values of individuals, and
studying relatively small segments of the world. He proposes that further work of this
kind must progress beyond the small segments to develop and validate measures based
upon subculture-level measurement structures that are analogous to those that have been
used for developing nation level measures, and there is a requirement to compare
within-nation variability to between-nation variability on a global scale. My project is a
segment of an overarching programme comparing within-nation cultural variability and
between-nation variability. Its contribution is incremental, not intended to provide
universal results.
The lack of importance of the national boundary of China, and the importance of culture
areas, are adequately demonstrated in publications by Tung, Worm and Fang (2008);
Littrell, Alon and Chan (2006); and Ralston, Yu, Wang, Terpstra, and He (1996).
Additionally, a fallacious idea is that China is often thought to be governed by the “Han
majority”, but this group is linguistically, culturally, and even genetically diverse.
Taiwanese professor Lee Hsiao-Feng (2008) argues that the concept “Chinese” is
actually an historically meaningless word in terms of homogeneity that appears to have
been developed as one of the justifications of rule over previously independent
minorities, primarily during the Qing Dynasty, ruling from 1644 to 1912, with a brief,
abortive restoration in 1917.
Searching Google Scholar with the argument “myth of the nation” in September 2010
yields more than 1000 citations. Walby (2003) argues that the nation-state is more
mythical than real, for four reasons: first, there are more nations than states; second,
several key examples of presumed nation-states are actually empires; third, there are
diverse and significant polities in addition to states, such as the European Union and
some organized religions; fourth, polities overlap and rarely politically saturate the
national territory where they are located. An implication of acknowledging the wider
range and overlapping nature of polities is to open greater conceptual space for the
analysis of such concepts as gender and ethnicity in analyses of globalization.
182