Confucian Liberalism
This weekend in the Hong Kong, the pan-democrats are holding a rally. Counter to the rally is a celebration of Confucius by the Hong Kong Confucian Academy. It has been asserted that the celebration has been organized by the so-called “Beijing loyalists” counter to the rally in order to hold up Confucian “harmony” as an alternative to the democrats’ liberalism. Whether this is an accurate characterization of the planning is not important. What matters is the impression that Confucianism can be presented as opposed to democratic liberalism. Any honest reading of the Confucian texts would reveal that, quite simply, it cannot.
The teachings of Confucius and Mencius are constructed around pointed criticism of rulers. Although history turned the tables on Confucius and Mencius when government leaders used their philosophy downward to call for better ministers and ultimately better subjects, the heart of their philosophy is upwards focused –– a call for better leaders to create better government. Moreover, it is a misinterpretation of Confucianism to say that harmony was its highest value. In fact, Confucius talked about humanity 仁 (ren), civility 礼 (li), and justice 义 (yi), and made little mention of harmony 和 (he). A dynamic vision of humanity 仁 (ren) that transformed leaders was the core of Mencian thinking. The Doctrine of the Mean focused more on harmony in its depiction of how sincerity and the middle way will enable humans to transcend their earthly place and form a union with Heaven, 天人合一 (tian ren he yi), but this harmony was not juxtaposed against criticism and free debate. In fact, sincerity was the core characteristic that would grant a person the transformative power to create the union with Heaven, Human, and Earth. Nor were the other Confucian books or even the later Confucian thinkers particularly enamoured with harmony.
The closest Confucianism comes to calling for a “harmonious society” is in Confucius’s descriptions of the five relationships. Confucius sees sensitive human relations as core expressions of humanity (ren) and as keys to leading a fully human life. However, harmony is not necessarily at the core of any of them, and in fact can be contrary to their highest fulfillment. Take values such as respect 孝 (xiao) between parent and child and loyalty 忠 (zhong) between ruler and minister, which seem hierarchical and authoritarian. In fact, the greatest loyalty and respect only can be demonstrated when one has the courage to disagree, perhaps saving a parent or ruler (in the modern day, the public) from a bad decision. Hence the Confucians placed great emphasis on remonstrating the king, which both Confucius and Mencius did, albeit to little avail.
Liberal Confucianism recognizes the core of Confucian thought is a call for better leaders and a better society. It is not the politics of “harmony”, be that good or bad. Nevertheless, Confucian Liberalism recognizes that free speech, accountable government, rule of law, and open elections are universal values that should be seen as continuations of the great Confucian tradition. If Confucius and Mencius were in Hong Kong in 2007, which event would they attend? With little doubt, they would be at the pan-democrat rally.
The teachings of Confucius and Mencius are constructed around pointed criticism of rulers. Although history turned the tables on Confucius and Mencius when government leaders used their philosophy downward to call for better ministers and ultimately better subjects, the heart of their philosophy is upwards focused –– a call for better leaders to create better government. Moreover, it is a misinterpretation of Confucianism to say that harmony was its highest value. In fact, Confucius talked about humanity 仁 (ren), civility 礼 (li), and justice 义 (yi), and made little mention of harmony 和 (he). A dynamic vision of humanity 仁 (ren) that transformed leaders was the core of Mencian thinking. The Doctrine of the Mean focused more on harmony in its depiction of how sincerity and the middle way will enable humans to transcend their earthly place and form a union with Heaven, 天人合一 (tian ren he yi), but this harmony was not juxtaposed against criticism and free debate. In fact, sincerity was the core characteristic that would grant a person the transformative power to create the union with Heaven, Human, and Earth. Nor were the other Confucian books or even the later Confucian thinkers particularly enamoured with harmony.
The closest Confucianism comes to calling for a “harmonious society” is in Confucius’s descriptions of the five relationships. Confucius sees sensitive human relations as core expressions of humanity (ren) and as keys to leading a fully human life. However, harmony is not necessarily at the core of any of them, and in fact can be contrary to their highest fulfillment. Take values such as respect 孝 (xiao) between parent and child and loyalty 忠 (zhong) between ruler and minister, which seem hierarchical and authoritarian. In fact, the greatest loyalty and respect only can be demonstrated when one has the courage to disagree, perhaps saving a parent or ruler (in the modern day, the public) from a bad decision. Hence the Confucians placed great emphasis on remonstrating the king, which both Confucius and Mencius did, albeit to little avail.
Liberal Confucianism recognizes the core of Confucian thought is a call for better leaders and a better society. It is not the politics of “harmony”, be that good or bad. Nevertheless, Confucian Liberalism recognizes that free speech, accountable government, rule of law, and open elections are universal values that should be seen as continuations of the great Confucian tradition. If Confucius and Mencius were in Hong Kong in 2007, which event would they attend? With little doubt, they would be at the pan-democrat rally.
posted by Andy Green at
9:37 AM
1 Comments:
Nice point. I'm sure you will discuss the distinction of neo-Confucianism and how Zhu Xi perverted the humane values of Confucianism later on. So much of what is commonly referred to as Confucianism is actually the product of this later form which stifled debate and encouraged blind obedience.
By
Hugo Restall, at 2:15 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home