NEW PERSPECTIVES QUARTERLY, WINTER 2010, Vol 27-2

>From Communism to Confucianism:

China’s Alternative to Liberal Democracy



Daniel A. Bell is professor of political philosophy at Tsinghua University in 
Beijing and the author of China’s New Confucianism: Politics and Everyday Life 
in a Changing Society. 

Beijing—Four decades ago, it would have been suicidal to say a good word about 
Confucius in Beijing. Confucius was the reactionary enemy, and all Chinese were 
encouraged to struggle against him. Chairman Mao himself was photographed on 
the cover of a revolutionary newspaper that announced the desecration of 
Confucius’s grave in Qufu. My own university was a hotbed of extreme leftism. 

How times have changed. Today, the Chinese Communist Party approves a film 
about Confucius starring the handsome leading man Chow Yun-Fat. The master is 
depicted as an astute military commander and teacher of humane and progressive 
values, with a soft spot for female beauty. What does this say about China’s 
political future? Confucius bombed at the box office, leading many to think 
that the revival of Confucianism will go the same way as the anti-Confucius 
campaigns in the Cultural Revolution. 

But perhaps it’s just a bad movie. Confucius received the kiss of death when it 
went head-to-head against the blockbuster Avatar. A vote for Confucius was seen 
as a vote against the heroic blue creatures from outer space. In the long term, 
however, Confucian revivalists may be on the right side of history. 

In the Cultural Revolution, Confucius was often just a label used to attack 
political enemies. Today, Confucianism serves a more legitimate political 
function; it can help to provide a new moral foundation for political rule in 
China. Communism has lost the capacity to inspire the Chinese, and there is 
growing recognition that its replacement needs to be grounded at least partly 
in China’s own traditions. As the dominant political tradition in China, 
Confucianism is the obvious alternative. 

The party has yet to re-label itself the Chinese Confucian Party, but it has 
moved closer to an official embrace of Confucianism. The 2008 Olympics 
highlighted Confucian themes, quoting The Analects of Confucius at the opening 
ceremonies and playing down any references to China’s experiment with 
communism. Cadres at the newly built Communist Party school in Shanghai proudly 
tell visitors that the main building is modeled on a Confucian scholar’s desk. 
Abroad, the government has been symbolically promoting Confucianism via 
branches of the Confucius Institute, a Chinese-language and cultural center 
similar to the Alliance Française. 

Of course, there is resistance as well. Elderly cadres, still influenced by 
Maoist antipathy to tradition, condemn efforts to promote ideologies outside a 
rigid Marxist framework. But the younger cadres in their 40s and 50s tend to 
support such efforts, and time is on their side. It’s easy to forget that the 
76-million-strong Chinese Communist Party is a large and diverse organization. 
The party itself is becoming more meritocratic—it now encourages 
high-performing students to join—and the increased emphasis on educated cadres 
is likely to generate more sympathy for Confucian values. 

But the revival of Confucianism is not just government-sponsored. On the 
contrary, the government is also reacting to developments outside its control. 
There has been a resurgence of interest in Confucianism among academics and in 
the Chinese equivalent of civil society. The renewed interest is driven partly 
by normative concerns. Thousands of educational experiments around the country 
promote the teaching of Confucian classics to young children; the assumption is 
that better training in the humanities improves the virtue of the learner. More 
controversially—because it’s still too sensitive to publicly discuss such 
questions in mainland China—Confucian thinkers put forward proposals for 
constitutional reform aiming to humanize China’s political system. 

An Uphill Struggle | Yet, the problem is not just the Chinese government. It 
can be an uphill struggle to convince people in Western countries that 
Confucianism can offer a progressive and humane path to political reform in 
China. Why does the revival of Confucianism so often worry Westerners? One 
reason may be a form of self-love. For most of the 20th century, Chinese 
liberals and Marxists engaged in a totalizing critique of their own heritage 
and looked to the West for inspiration. It may have been flattering for 
Westerners—look, they want to be just like us! —but there is less sympathy now 
that Chinese are taking pride in their own traditions for thinking about social 
and political reform. But more understanding and a bit of open-mindedness can 
take care of that problem. 

Another reason may be that the revival of Confucianism is thought to be 
associated with the revival of Islamic “fundamentalism” and its anti-Western 
tendencies. Perhaps the revival of closed-minded and intolerant Christian 
“fundamentalism” also comes to mind. But the revival of Confucianism in China 
is not so opposed to liberal social ways (other than extreme individualistic 
lifestyles, in which the good life is sought mainly outside social 
relationships). What it does propose is an alternative to Western political 
ways, and that may be the main worry. But this worry stems from an honest 
mistake: the assumption that less support for Western-style democracy means 
increased support for authoritarianism. In China, packaging the debate in terms 
of “democracy” versus “authoritarianism” crowds out possibilities that appeal 
to Confucian political reformers. 

Confucian reformers generally favor more freedom of speech in China. What they 
question is democracy in the sense of Western-style competitive elections as 
the mechanism for choosing the country’s most powerful rulers. One clear 
problem with “one person, one vote” is that equality ends at the boundaries of 
the political community; those outside are neglected. The national focus of the 
democratically elected political leaders is assumed; they are meant to serve 
only the community of voters. Even democracies that work well tend to focus on 
the interests of citizens and neglect the interests of foreigners. But 
political leaders, especially leaders of big countries such as China, make 
decisions that affect the rest of the world (consider global warming), and so 
they need to consider the interests of the rest of the world. 

Hence, reformist Confucians put forward political ideals that are meant to work 
better than Western-style democracy in terms of securing the interests of all 
those affected by the policies of the government, including future generations 
and foreigners. Their ideal is not a world where everybody is treated as an 
equal but one where the interests of non-voters would be taken more seriously 
than in most nation-centered democracies. And the key value for realizing 
global political ideals is meritocracy, meaning equality of opportunity in 
education and government, with positions of leadership being distributed to the 
most virtuous and qualified members of the community. The idea is that everyone 
has the potential to become morally exemplary, but, in real life, the capacity 
to make competent and morally justifiable political judgments varies among 
people, and an important task of the political system is to identify those with 
above-average ability. 

CONFUCIAN VALUES IN PRACTICE | What might such values mean in practice? In the 
past decade, Confucian intellectuals have put forward political proposals that 
aim to combine “Western” ideas of democracy with “Confucian” ideas of 
meritocracy. Rather than subordinating Confucian values and institutions to 
democracy as an a priori dictum, they contain a division of labor, with 
democracy having priority in some areas and meritocracy in others. If it’s 
about land disputes in rural China, farmers should have a greater say. If it’s 
about pay and safety disputes, workers should have a greater say. In practice, 
it means more freedom of speech and association and more representation for 
workers and farmers in some sort of democratic house. 

But what about matters such as foreign policy and environmental protection? 
What the government does in such areas affects the interests of non-voters, and 
they need some form of representation as well. Hence, Confucian thinkers put 
forward proposals for a meritocratic house of government, with deputies 
selected by such mechanisms as free and fair competitive examinations, that 
would have the task of representing the interests of non-voters typically 
neglected by democratically selected decision-makers. 

One obvious objection to examinations is that they cannot test for the kinds of 
virtues that concerned Confucius—flexibility, humility, compassion and 
public-spiritedness—and that, ideally, would also characterize political 
decision-makers in the modern world. It’s true that examinations won’t test 
perfectly for those virtues, but the question is whether deputies chosen by 
such examinations are more likely to be farsighted than those chosen by 
elections. 

There are reasons to believe so. Drawing on extensive empirical research, Bryan 
Caplan’s book The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad 
Policies shows that voters are often irrational, and he suggests tests of voter 
competence as a remedy. So examinations would test for basic economic policy 
(and knowledge of international relations), but they would also cover knowledge 
of the Confucian classics, testing for memorization as well as interpretation. 
The leading Confucian political thinker, Jiang Qing, argues that examinations 
could set a framework and moral vocabulary for subsequent political actions, 
and successful candidates would also need to be evaluated in terms of how they 
perform in practice. 

Farfetched?  It’s no less so than scenarios that envision a transition to 
Western-style liberal democracy (because both scenarios assume a more open 
society). And it answers the key worry about the transition to democracy: that 
it translates into short-term, unduly nationalistic policymaking. It’s also a 
matter of what standards we should use to evaluate China’s political progress. 
Politically speaking, most people think China should look more like the West. 
But one day, perhaps, we will hope that the West looks more like China.

 

Kirim email ke