Neo-Liberalism Meets Neo-Confucianism

Kenneth Murphy

 

The West has dominated the world ever since the industrial revolution. Today 
that dominance seems threatened by the East Asian heirs to Confucianism, the 
ideology par excellence of state cohesion.  

Centuries of inculcation with Confucianism was as important to the rise of East 
Asia’s hyper-growth economies as the conjunction of Protestantism and the rise 
of capitalism was to the west. Confucianism’s tenets still provide an inner 
compass to most East Asians in a post-Confucian age, just as Biblical 
admonitions remain standards for the West in a post-religious age.

The basic thrust of Confucianism has changed little since Confucius’s disciples 
recorded his aphorisms a generation before Socrates. Indeed, Confucianism 
became the official ideology of the Chinese state two centuries before the 
birth of Christ.

Confucianism was essentially a philosophical justification of government by 
benevolent bureaucracy under a virtuous ruler. Virtue ensured harmony between 
man and nature, as well as obedience within a stratified society. As one 
Confucian classic put it: Possessing virtue will give the ruler the people. 
Possessing the people will give him the territory. Possessing the territory 
will give him its wealth. Possessing the wealth, he will have resources for 
expenditure. Virtue is the root; wealth is the result.

During the neo-Confucian renaissance of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, a 
metaphysical dimension was added to fill a gap exposed by Buddhism’s inroads 
into China. Thereafter, a good Confucian could, with untroubled conscience, 
scorn the Buddhist renunciation of the world. This restatement of fundamental 
precepts restored Confucianism to a primacy in China and neighboring states 
that remained unchallenged for 700 years.

Neo-Confucianism provided the basic ideology for China’s admiring neighbors – 
Japan, Korea, and Vietnam – until the advent of the West. Its tenets were 
highly appropriate to the settled, sophisticated agrarian civilizations of 
pre-nineteenth-century East Asia, for they knitted together society and polity 
in a manner calculated to promote stability and harmony.

The ultimate guarantee of harmony was the ruler’s justness, which permitted him 
to enjoy the “mandate of heaven”; the people had a right, indeed an obligation, 
to rebel against a tyrant. But while the ethical basis of Neo-Confucianism was 
crucial, the Chinese also understood the need for a morally motivated 
bureaucracy, and thus perfected in the seventh century the world’s first 
examination system for selecting bureaucrats, with the Confucian canon as the 
syllabus.

Of course, the Neo-Confucian system was not immune to mankind’s appetites. Many 
Confucian emperors were brutal. Yet stability was achieved. There was only one 
change of dynasty in China between 1368 and the end of the imperial era in 
1911. The Tokugawa Shoguns, who completed the reunification of Japan in 1600, 
remained in power for more than two and a half centuries. In Korea, the Yi 
dynasty ruled from 1382 until the Japanese conquest of 1910. Periodic civil 
strife and rebellion were not eliminated, but only in Vietnam was the longevity 
of a dynasty a cloak for inextinguishable internecine warfare.

Like a happy and secure childhood, Confucian civilization bestowed upon its 
practitioners the self-confidence to meet the challenge of the West. Since 
Confucianism was essentially an agnostic ideology, concerned with the 
management of the visible world, the post-Confucians experienced little of the 
spiritual angst that afflicted Hindus, Muslims, and Christians in their 
collision with the “materialism” of industrial society.

Confucian civic culture also provided the basis for a long history of 
successful self-government. East Asians entered the modern world of nation 
states in self-consciously discrete secular units. By contrast, the Indian 
subcontinent, with two major religions and a dozen major linguistic groups, was 
united in modern times only under British rule.

Applied learning is the key to the post-Confucian states’ success. Confucian 
literati, shunning manual labor, grew their fingernails long, but they never 
displayed antipathy towards the world of affairs. The Chinese myth of success 
was the bright peasant boy whose village clubbed together to educate him and 
whose subsequent success resulted in the elevation of all who had helped him on 
his way into the civil service.

Ideally, state and family were mirror images. The emperor was the supreme 
paterfamilias, his benevolent rule reciprocated by the obedience of his 
ministers and subjects, while family members were fixed in their appropriate 
hierarchical relationships. Families and nations that obeyed together stayed 
together.

Meiji Japan grasped the advantages of making the nation a macrocosm of the 
family. An imperial order in 1890 outlined the objectives of education: the 
Confucian concepts of loyalty, obedience, and filial piety were to be 
transferred from the family to the nation. At about the same time, the Chinese 
scholar Yen Fu – whose translations of Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, Herbert 
Spencer, and Montesquieu were read even by the young Mao – also concluded that 
filial piety fostered habits of disciplined subordination to authority that 
could be applied to the factory and the polity.

During the past century, the post-Confucian states have accustomed themselves 
to a pluralistic world of theoretically equal nation states. But it is 
difficult to know how deep that adjustment has gone. If the West is perceived 
to be attempting to maintain the leadership it snatched 200 years ago by 
industrializing first, thereby denying the post-Confucians the fruits of their 
dynamism permanently, the Chinese, in particular, will conclude that pluralism 
is eyewash and that the West’s worldview in fact replicates their traditional 
one.

Today’s trade and currency battles would then become a Kulturkampf. In a few 
decades, when China’s economy equals America’s in size, the winner will be hard 
to pick. Better for the West to accept equality now – and struggle to maintain 
it.

Kenneth Murphy’s latest book is Unquiet Vietnam: A Journey to the Vanishing 
World of Indochina (Gibson Square Books, London). He is currently a senior 
fellow of Smolny Collegium, Saint Petersburg University, Russia.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2005. 
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/murphy1 

 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



Bantu Aceh! Klik:
http://www.pusatkrisisaceh.or.id 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ekonomi-nasional/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Kirim email ke