Can a global diffusion of Confucian ideas increase the world-wide political power and influence of the PRC? I think a fair amount about this question, since I am rather actively involved in spreading Confucian and Taoist ideas to Americans ("ancient Chinese thought in modern American life" and all that) but I am also a critic of some aspects of PRC politics. So, I was interested to see this piece in the Asia Times by Jian Jinbo (via Western Confucian).
Jian, an assistant professor of the Institute of International
Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai, notes the revival of Confucianism in the PRC and the (historically ironic) support given to it by the Party leadership. He then goes on to notice that a broader expansion of Confucian ideas to other cultures will be difficult for a variety of reasons. One factor is the Party's continuing adherence to materialist Marxist ideology, which limits the extent to which it can formally embrace the more humanistic Confucianism:
Thus, if Confucianism cannot be officially endorsed as a core of Chinese traditional culture but only pragmatically regarded as a pawn to help the economy, it can hardly be promoted worldwide as a pillar of Chinese soft power.
Indeed, he notes the rather cynical manner in which party and government officials, and some intellectual entrepreneurs, approach the return of Confucianism:
However, local governments' respect for Confucius is centered on economic
interests. By holding memorial ceremonies, tourists are attracted to a region
and local products are promoted. For local officials, there is less culture on
their minds than local gross domestic product growth – a sure ticket to
promotion. Some intellectuals also make fortunes by "popularizing" Confucian
ideas with paid lectures and by publishing books.
All this is embodied in a popular propaganda slogan, "Culture provides the
stage for the economy to perform". That is, culture is just a means of fueling
economic growth.
In short, in the early 21st century, Confucianism is an assistant to the
Chinese god of wealth (and a representative of Chinese diplomacy) but not a
tutor for Chinese souls.
He may be on to something here (even if I am somewhat more sympathetic to Yu Dan, the unnamed "intellectual" here).
I will take some exception this point, however:
Besides the government's reluctance, there are internal problems that make it
hard to modernize Confucianism. Confucianism emerged 2,500 years ago and was
enriched throughout the country's dynastic history to become an ideology in
justifying and safeguarding the hierarchical structure of political and social
systems.As such, many of its ideas are outdated, such as being loyal to authority,
non-violation of the hierarchical order of families and society and
anti-individualism. These values are in conflict with modernity and cannot be
converted into acceptable concepts to people today.Related to this, it is also difficult to make Confucianism universal. With the
rise of their hard power, Western countries have successfully established some
of their values, such as free markets, democracy, rule of law and equality of
human beings. As a result, many countries have striven to build their
political, economic and social systems based on these values originating from
the West.
His reference to "hard power" is to be distinguished from "soft power," the power to attract and transform as opposed to the "hard power" of coercion and inducement. Thus, Jian is arguing that it is difficult to make Confucianism into an appealing, universal philosophy because, beyond its anachronistic qualities, it is hard to envision a wholesale abandonment of notions such as "democracy," "rule of law," and "equality." It is important to keep in mind that the PRC government embraces these ideals in general; differences with the US and other Western governments are drawn in specific applications of these general ideas. There would seem to be little conceptual room for a major departure from these sorts of established ideals.
Again, Jian may be right. It may be difficult, under contemporary conditions of globalization, to build Confucianism into a significant source of "soft power" for the PRC. But Jian might be underestimating the extent to which Confucian ideals can be adapted to modern conditions without losing their philosophical distinctiveness.
I think this is too simplistic a statement of core Confucian ideals: "…being loyal to authority,
non-violation of the hierarchical order of families and society and
anti-individualism."
Granted, Confucianism might expect a greater measure of loyalty than certain strains of liberalism, but this is not to say that Confucius or Mencius expects something like blind loyalty. Quite to the contrary, Confucianism encourages the noble-minded to speak up when those in positions of authority abuse their power or act unjustly. Similarly, the story of Shun, as recounted by Mencius, shows us that sons may sometimes have to disobey fathers in order to serve a broader filiality. And the general resistance among Confucians to reduce complex ethical problems to simple rules that can be applied regardless of context suggests a sensitivity to the uniqueness of each person and each situation, a sensibility that is conducive to a kind of moral individualism. This is not the individualism of neo-classical economics (thank goodness) but neither is it an absolute collectivism.
In other words, the interpretation and flexibility of the central Confucian notions of Humanity (ren), Duty (yi), and Ritual (li) open up more possibilities for adaptation to modern conditions than Jian may realize. Whether that ultimately serves the interests of the PRC is another matter altogether. The realization of some sort of "soft power" is complicated by a point I made in a post two years ago: Confucianism is not nationalism.
The Useless Tree 
Leave a reply to Sam Cancel reply