A story in the LA Times over the weekend points out just how far many people in China have fallen from the Confucian ideal:

Respect for parents and clan elders has been a cornerstone of Chinese
culture for thousands of years, part of a defining social contract in
which parents cared for their children while they were young and
children supported their parents in their dotage.

But
something happened on the way to the 21st century. The fundamental glue
that bound generations through dynasties, wars and famines started
coming unstuck in the face of rapid economic and social change. Add it
up, traditionalists fear, and the very definition of what it means to
be Chinese is under threat.

      The piece goes on to describe various ways in which governments, local and national, are trying to induce people to do better by their aging parents.  But if it really were a "Confucian society," that is, if the values and practices of Confucianism were reproduced socially and culturally, there would be no need for external material incentives to do the right thing, right?  In any event, Confucius himself would no doubt see the rise of formal government programs to push people to care for their parents as a sign of social failure.  Duty cannot be generated from without, it must emerge from within.

When Adept Yu asked about honoring parents, the Master said: "These days, being a worthy child just means keeping parents well-fed.  That’s what we do for dogs and horses.  Everyone can feed their parents – but without reverence, they may as well be feeding animals.  (2.7)

   The Man is tough. 

    Of course, we can no doubt find plenty of individuals who are loving and caring of their parents, good sons and daughters in a Confucian sort of way.  But, at the level of society as a whole, can we give up on the adjective "Confucian"?