In the course of the 20th century, the world's inhabitants have shared one fate in common. Sooner or later, they and their society have been plunged into the maelstrom of accelerating change, an upheaval at the root of which are the explosive developments in science and technology. The global revolution has unfolded in different ways, and has had diverse ideological underpinnings, structural attributes and institutional foundations. Other variables of great significance are timing and leadership. The timing of the revolutionary effort together with the stage of preparation on the part of the society involved have had a major influence in determining the degree of coercion likely to be employed. If a reluctant, ill-prepared society is pulled into modernity largely against its will, significant force has often been required, although the creation of a new faith through intensive ideological indoctrination has reduced the quotient of coercion in certain instances. Timing has also determined the develop-mental models available as well as the prevailing ideological currents, and hence the influences likely to carry the greatest weight with elites committed to change.

Some of the most important developments of the last quarter of the century have taken place in the Asia-Pacific region. Of these, the Chinese shift from Communist ideology and central planning to a commitment to build a market economy has had extensive ramifications. These have led to much speculation about the re-emergence of China as a powerful actor in world politics. The idea of Greater China is one of the products of that speculation. The lack of precision in the term “Greater China” – whether it should cover Hong Kong-Macao (hereafter Hong Kong), Taiwan and all of the People's Republic of China (PRC) or only parts of it – should not prevent it being used to explore some current and future developments. In this article, which examines the impact the concept of Greater China has on the Chinese overseas, the term would obviously not include those Chinese who live outside. Nevertheless, depending on which aspect is emphasized, the actual area covered can be significant.

In 1983 when The China Quarterly published a special issue on Hong Kong, I attempted to synthesize the history of its urban social life, coining the term “Hong Kong Man” to describe what I considered to be the emergence of an identifiable unique social animal. Hong Kong Man, I suggested, was neither Chinese nor British. I characterized him as quick-thinking, flexible, tough for survival, excitement-craving, sophisticated in material tastes, and self-made in a strenuously competitive world. He operated in the context of a most uncertain future, control over which was in the hands of others, and for this as well as for historical reasons he lived “life in the short term”.