The resurgence of Confucianism in China is of great political significance, because the Chinese Communist Party leadership is keen to reshape the ideological landscape at home.
Under Deng Xiaoping’s (鄧小平) economic reforms, the ethos of capitalism has dominated every aspect of society, but rapid transformation has caused much anxiety among the populace. Rampant corruption, ruthless competition and consumerism are the symptoms of popular insecurity. Many people worry about the absence of a moral code to replace Maoism.
Some people have turned to Confucianism for psychological support in order to deal with the stress and strain of a fast-changing economy. Prominent writer Yu Dan (于丹) adapts many of Confucius’ (孔子) ideas for the tired and stressed-out, weaving his ancient sayings with the daily experiences of her urban audience and providing self-help guides on personal fulfillment.
Meanwhile, Confucianism gives government officials an invaluable resource for addressing the nation’s new political needs. With a sense of confidence about China’s economic accomplishments, the Communist leadership is articulating unique Chinese perspectives on many developmental and governance issues.
Even though some party leaders fall short of embracing Confucianism, they recast this philosophy as a new soft power to compliment the country’s growing status, and have founded hundreds of Confucius Institutes (孔子學院) worldwide. Funded by the Chinese National Office for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language (中國國家漢語國際推廣領導小組辦公室) and formed in partnership with many universities, high schools and cultural institutions, the Confucius Institutes promote the study of Mandarin abroad and establish exchange programs between hosting organizations and Chinese universities.
The appeal of China’s top-down developmental model seems to have become an irresistible alternative to the West. The Communist leaders acknowledge that Confucianism does more than justify an alternative model of state-led capitalism; it can counter the West and reframe the normative order of the international system. This reveals Beijing’s determination to use Confucianism as a new weapon in the global battle of ideas and to rebrand China as an alternative model of modernization based on non-interference, freedom from Western hegemony and a more dominant role for the state.
Evidently, the Communist regime seeks to appropriate Confucianism as a new cultural force against the West. After all, the state can no longer employ Mao Zedong (毛澤東) as a political icon, because of the unprecedented pain and suffering that he caused during the Great Famine (1958–1962) and the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976).
Nevertheless, such an authoritarian rhetoric lacks theoretical substance and reveals nothing about the reality of China. The pro-independence uprisings in Tibet and Xinjiang, the escalation of social conflicts and labor unrest, and the cries for democracy in Hong Kong suggest that the country is plagued with severe internal discontent.
Perhaps intellectuals and community activists ought to apply the Confucian principle of good governance to defend civil society against complete incorporation by a powerful state. In a similar fashion, the Communist leaders should take seriously Confucius’ idea of political legitimacy to assess their own leadership qualities and to envision a more cosmopolitan identity for the country. Otherwise, the idea of a changing mandate of heaven might become a fulfilling prophesy in the 21st century.
Joseph Tse-hei Lee is professor of history and co-director of the Global Asia studies program at Pace University in New York.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS