Nothing demonstrates the shallowness of the revival of Confucianism in China as the destruction of the country’s physical cultural heritage:

China’s rapid urbanization has devastated the country’s
architectural and cultural heritage sites, state news organizations
reported Monday.      

“Senseless actions” by local officials in
their pursuit of renovation and modernization have “devastated” the
sites, Qiu Baoxing, the vice minister of construction, was quoted as
saying by the newspaper China Daily.

      The old is crushed under the rush to the new.  Money, of course, determines these outcomes, and that means that much of the "old" that is left is simply a reconstruction, a reinvention with little organic connection to the realities of the past, to suit the business demands of the present:

Even many so-called "heritage" schemes have a dubious value. The
popular Xintiandi area of Shanghai was flattened and rebuilt in an old
style — plus Starbucks, bars and boutiques. Such is its commercial
success that many other municipalities consider it a model for
"cultural renovation".

Tong Mingkang, deputy director of the
state administration of cultural heritage, said this faking of history
made the country poorer. "It is like tearing up an invaluable painting
and replacing it with a cheap print," he told the state media.

    A modern-day Confucian – that is, a serious Confucian, one willing to live the life proposed by Confucius, not simply mouth some platitudes – would have to be saddened by all this:

The Master said: "If you can revive the ancient and use it to understand the modern, then you’re worthy to be a teacher.
(Analects, 2.11)

     He obviously sees a certain value in preserving, not simply re-branding and re-marketing, the past.  One of the most common critiques of Confucianism, articulated most effectively by May 4th nationalists, is that it is backward-looking, it reveres the past so much that it makes living in a modern context all but impossible.  There may be some truth in that, especially when we consider the ways in which Confucianism had been institutionalized, and ossified, in imperial China.

     But I do not think the distinction between past and present has to be quite so stark for a modern Confucian.  Yes, the past should be respected and kept in mind but the purpose of doing so is to encourage moral behavior in the present.  We should "revive the ancient" not for the sake of the ancient, but to serve the present.  Ritual need not be mindlessly copied from the past, but creatively adapted to present circumstances:

      

The
Master said: “Ritual calls for caps of linen, but now everyone uses black
silk. It’s more frugal, so I follow the
common practice.

      “Ritual calls for bowing before ascending
the stairs, but now everyone bows only at the top of the stairs. That’s too presumptuous, so even though it
violates the common practice, I bow before ascending.” (Analects, 9.3)

      The past is a reference, a starting point, but the construction of moral action in the present requires careful consideration of immediate circumstances and context.   That is impossible if the past has been plowed under, if all there is left is a flattened simulacrum devoid of cultural depth.  When that happens there is no starting point, only endless self-referential drift.  A continuous video loop of Paris Hilton declaring that she will no longer play the dumb blond as she plays the dumb blond.  And that is where China seems headed – rather like the US, and its determined ignorance of its own past.