{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03542009884678748, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014827018121911038, 'mean_word_length': 4.813397129186603, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Rice Economy of Asia . By Randolph Barker and Robert W. Herdt, with Beth Rose. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future, 1985. xvii, 324 pp. Figures, Tables, Bibliography, Index. $30 (cloth); $12 (paper).

In a chapter entitled "The Last Wave," Anderson argues that the new states that proliferated after World War II "took from linguistic European nationalism its ardent populism, and from official nationalism its Russifying policy—orientation" (p. 104). Here I think he sadly underrates the forces at work on both the popular and elite levels in colonial societies which owed little or nothing to the Europeans. In Vietnam, for example, local Viet Minh activists of the 1940s drew fully as much inspiration from Buddhist millenarianism and Neo-Confucian ideals of righteousness and propriety as they did from French teachings. And the state established by Ho Chi Minh probably owed as much to a thousand years of Vietnamese dynastic experience as to imported precedents from Paris or Moscow. Admittedly other Asian and African states that lacked a majority ethnic group tended to be fashioned out of whole colonial cloth, yet it was not long before indigenous attitudes reshaped nationalism there as well.