This paper discusses the efforts of Chinese rulers to create sanitized forms of Confucianism in order to bolster ideological orthodoxy, and counter-reactions within the intelligentsia and civil society to these efforts. This paper looks at the thoughts of some Chinese scholars in both the imperial and contemporary era who have opposed the kind of spiritual centralism, or orthodoxy, with which the rulers have aimed to reinforce concrete centralism. It also seeks to draw a parallel between contemporary academic discussion on some recently unearthed texts and between-the-lines criticism in one classical prose anthology during the late imperial era as forms of grass-roots level dissidence which could escape the attention of the censorship machinery. Furthermore, this paper compares the calls for localism by Confucian scholars in the imperial era with the ideas of modern promoters of communalism (also known as libertarian municipalism), which, as a theory of government, refers to a federation of autonomous units of local rule. This discussion is related to the wider debate about the relationship between Confucianism and democracy.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
In Chinese, fazhi 法治. It is debatable if it can be translated as the rule of law. More accurate would be ‘rule by law’.
The meaning of gong 公 is best translated here as ‘communal’. It belongs to the same semantic field with tong 同, meaning, inter alia, ‘shared’ or ‘conjoined’.
For example, during the war against Japan the Chinese could say: “Manchuria belongs now to the Tianxia of the Japanese.”
Where not otherwise noted, references to classical quotations indicate their location in the Chinese Text Project database (CText.org).
Unless otherwise indicated, all translations from Chinese are by the author.
Originally these maxims were indeed Confucian, as they had been drafted by Zhu Xi, albeit for different purpose (Ho 2011, p. 206).
A translation of the 16 maxims can be found in de Bary and Lufrano (2000, pp. 71–72).
Gu’s thinking was in part motivated also by his anti-Manchu feelings.
Jun can be translated as ‘prefectures’ and xian as ‘counties’. Since the Qin dynasty, both were instruments of centralized government in the local level.
Lufrano (1997, 17, 33) writes of merchant manuals, but the situation was likely to also have been the same for other types of textbooks.
Hong et al. 2001 include a non-conclusive but nevertheless impressive list of classical literature compilations from the different dynasties. These numbers based on that list are probably at least indicative: the number of compilations published during the Song dynasty was 62, with the Yuan, Ming and Qing having 5, 24 and 80 respectively.
Junxian zhi, tianxia an 郡縣治天下安. The origin of the saying is unclear. Some Chinese web-commentaries identify the source as the Shiji, but searches from the Chinese Text Project database do not reveal the saying, in whole or in part, there or anywhere else.
Some texts found in Guodian are widely believed to be parts of the now lost Zisizi, the collected writings of Zisi.
The translations of the virtues differ; for example ‘benevolence’ (ren) could be interpreted as ‘humanity’ or ‘fraternity’ or ‘honorability’, depending on the source and context.
Kingly Way (wang dao 王道) and hegemonic rule (ba dao 霸道) are opposites often referred to in Chinese literature on statecraft. The former refers to the rule of a benevolent and virtuous king, and the latter to immoral tyranny.
Wu Jiaxiang is known as an advocate of “neo-authoritarianism”, which is criticized of being just a euphemism for benevolent dictatorship and a catch-phrase for those who believe China is not yet ready for democracy. The democracy Wu is promoting in his book appears to be a form of local democracy, whereas he seems to think that democracy on a national scale would lead the country into chaos, and then back into autocracy.
Kim (2014, p. 8 fn. 18) refers in particular to Daniel Bell, Bai Tongdong, David L. Hall and Roger Ames.
Communalism may be seen as one way to alleviate the tension between governmental power and responsiveness (see Almond and Verba 1989, p. 343) troubling many democratic societies. Communalist thinkers follow along similar lines to Almond and Verba who suggested (1989) that the tension can be best dealt with by combining parochial, subject, and participant orientations of the citizens: “What is required is a process by which individuals can come to develop a sense of common political identity; and identity that implies common affective commitment to the political system, as well as a sense of identity with one’s fellow citizens” (p. 371). In a manner befitting Confucianism, Almond and Verba (1989, p. 370) also stress the importance of education in developing civic culture.
Bookchin (1982, p. 318) writes that in an ecological society, hierarchies would be replaced by interdependencies. Ideally, the five relations (father—son, ruler—minister etc.) in traditional Chinese thinking were bi-directional, and hence there was an element of interdependency. Nevertheless, it is hard to deny the underlying emphasis on hierarchical structures and the importance of knowing one’s place.
An exception to the rule is the “heretic” Li Zhi (Lee 2012, pp. 21, 74).
According to the Analects, Confucius regarded Heaven with awe, respected rites and rituals, and did not overrule the possibility of the existence of gods and spirits. However, the general ethos of his teachings calls for concentrating on here-and-now realities, and working for practical solutions.
Bookchin stresses that reason needs to be guided by Libertarian ethics (1982, p. 353).
There does not seem to be an established translation of communalism in Chinese. I find gongshe zhuyi best because it reflects the origin of communalist thinking in the Paris Commune, and also because of the meaning of gongshe in classical texts: ‘the altar for public offerings to the Earth’, symbolizing the union of the state. Admittedly, the word gongshe probably leads most Chinese to think about the People’s Communes.
Almond, G. A., & Verba, S. (1989). The civic culture: Political attitudes and democracy in five nations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Ames, R. T. (2012). Confucian role ethics. A vocabulary. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.
Bell, D. (2013). Communitarianism. In E. N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2013 edition). Retrieved from December 15, 2015 from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/communitarianism/.
Bell, D. A. (2015). The China model: Political meritocracy and the limits of democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bell, D. A., & Chaibong, H. (2007). Introduction: The contemporary relevance of Confucianism. In D. A. Bell & H. Chaibong (Eds.), Confucianism for the modern world (pp. 1–28). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Biehl, J. (1998). Radical cities and social revolution: An interview with Janet Biehl”. Perspectives on anarchist theory (Vol. 2, No. 1). Retrieved May 6, 2015 from http://flag.blackened.net/ias/3biehlinterview.htm.
Bookchin, M. (1982). The ecology of freedom: The emergence and dissolution of hierarchy. Palo Alto, CA: Cheshire Books.
Bookchin, M. (1986). The modern crisis. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.
Chang, J. 常建华. (1988) “Shengyu guangxun yu Qingdai xiaozhi” 圣谕广训与清代孝治. Nankai shixue 1/1988. Retrieved December 29, 2007 from http://www.legal-history.net/articleshow.asp?c_class=5&id=949&c_page=1.
Cheng, T.-H. (1946). China moulded by Confucius: The Chinese way in western light. London: Stevens & Sons Limited.
Chow, K. (1994). The rise of Confucian ritualism in late imperial China: Ethics, classics and lineage discourse. Taipei: Stanford University Press/SMC Publishing.
Creel, H. G. (1949). Confucius: The man and the myth. New York: The John Day Company.
de Bary, W. T. & Lufrano, R. (2000) (ed.). Sources of Chinese tradition: From 1600 through the twentieth century (vol. 2), 2nd edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dirlik, Arif. (2011). Guoxue/national learning in the age of global modernity. China Perspectives, 2011(1), 4–13.
England, V. (2009) “HK sells a book banned in China”. BBC News, Hong Kong, 28 Sep 2009. Retrieved September 2009, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8278014.stm.
Fox, R. A. (1997). Confucian and communitarian responses to liberal democracy. The Review of Politics, 59(3), 561–592.
Fröhlich, T. (2010) ‘Confucian democracy’ and its Confucian critics: Mou Zongsan and Tang Junyi on the limits of Confucianism. Oriens Extremus 49, 167–200. Retrieved January 4, 2014 from http://www.oriens-extremus.de/inhalt/oe49.html.
Ho, N. P. (2011) The legal philosophy of Zhu Xi (朱熹) (1130–1200) and Neo-Confucianism’s possible contributions to modern Chinese legal reform. Tsinghua Law Review, 3: 167–214. http://tsinghuachinalawreview.org/articles/PDF/TCLR_0302_Ho.pdf, 4. 1. 2014.
Hong, B. 洪本健 et al. (2001) (ed.). Jieti huiping Guwen guanzhi 解题汇评古文观止, vols. 1–2. Shanghai: Huadong Shifan Daxue Chubanshe.
Jiang, G. 姜广辉. (2007) “Guodian Chu-jian yu zaoqi Ruxue” 郭店楚简与早期儒学. Lunwen Tianxia lunwenwang. Retrieved November 18, 2009 from http://www.lunwentianxia.com/products.free.3455418.1/.
Kallio, J. (2011a). Tradition in Chinese Politics. The Party-state’s reinvention of the past and the critical response from public intellectuals. FIIA Report 27. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Retrieved March 2, 2014 from http://www.fiia.fi/fi/publication/165/tradition_in_chinese_politics/.
Kallio, J. (2011b). Enlightenment for the Masses. Confucian Education in the Manner of Guwen guanzhi. Helsinki: Gaudeamus Helsinki University Press (e-book).
Kallio, J. (2014). (transl. & ed.). Mestari Kongin keskustelut. Kungfutselaisuuden ydinolemus. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Kim, S. (2014). Confucian democracy in East Asia, theory and practise. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, P. C. (2012). Li Zhi 李贄, Confucianism and the virtue of desire. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Leibold, James. (2010). The Beijing olympics and China’s conflicted national form. The China Journal, 63, 1–24.
Liang, T. 梁涛. 2009. “Huidao Zisi qu—Rujia daotonglun de jiantao yu chonggou” 回到“子思”去—儒家道统论的检讨与重构. Xueshu yanjiu, 2/2009. Retrieved October 30, 2009 from http://www.confucius2000.com/admin/list.asp?id=4101.
Lin, A. 林安梧. (1994) Cong’danyuan er tongyi’ dao’duoyuan er yitong’ – yi’Wen-hua Zhongguo’ yi gainian wei hexin de lijie yu quanshi 從「單元而統一」到「多元而一統」—以「文化中國」一概念為核心的理解與詮釋. In: Qinan, C. & Yingxiong, Z. (eds.) Wenhua Zhongguo—linian yu shijian (pp. 51–65). Taibei: Chongchen Wenhua Shiye Gufen Youxiangongsi.
Liu, J. 劉九洲. (2000) (ed.). Xin yi Gu Tinglin wenji 新譯顧亭林文集. Taibei: Sanmin Shuju
Lufrano, R. J. (1997). Honorable merchants: Commerce and self-cultivation in late imperial China. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Luo, G. 罗国杰. (1999) “Zhongguo gudai Rujia sixiang yu zhengzhi tongzhi” 中国古代儒家思想与政治统治. In Kemin, Z. (ed.) Zhong-wai lishi wenti ba ren tan (pp. 404–444). Beijing: Zhong-Gong Zhongyang Dangxiao Chubanshe.
Peterson, W. (1988). “Confucian learning in Late Ming Thought”. In: Twitchett, D. & Mote, F. W. (ed.). The Cambridge History of China. The Ming Dynasty 1368–1644, Part 2 (Vol. 8, pp. 708–788). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Spence, J. D. (2001). Treason by the Book. New York: Penguin Books.
Wu, J. 吴嫁祥. (2013). Gong Tianxia – Duo zhongxin zhili yu shuang zhuti faquan 公天下—多中心治理与双主体法权. Nanning: Guangxi Shifan Daxue Chubanshe.
Xiao, Q. 肖群忠. (2015) “Ren yi xin he minben Datong—Zhonghua hexin jiazhi ‘xin liu de’ lun” 仁义信和民本大同—中华核心价值“新六德”论. In Guoji Ruxue Lianhehui (ed.). Ruxue: Shijie heping yu fazhan. Jinian Kongzi danchen 2565 zhounian guoji xueshu yantaohui lunwenji, Vol. 2. Beijing: Jiuzhou Chubanshe.
Xiao, J. 肖建生. (2007). Zhongguo wenming de fansi 中国文明的反思. Beijing: Zhongguo Shehui Kexueyuan Chubanshe.
Xinhua English.news.cn. (2014). “Xi stresses core socialist values.” 25 February 2014. Retrieved May 27, 2015 http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-02/25/c_126190257.htm.
Xinhua English.news.cn. (2015). “Xi stresses CPC governance at county level”. Retrieved June 30, 2015 from http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-06/30/c_134369805.htm.
Xinhuanet.com. (2015). “Xi Jinping jian youxiu Xian-Wei shuji” 习近平会见全国优秀县委书记. Retrieved June 30, 2015 from http://news.xinhuanet.com/2015-06/30/c_1115773120.htm.
Yao, X. (Ed.). (2013). The encyclopedia of Confucianism. New York: Routledge.
Yu, Y 余英時. (1987). Shi yu Zhongguo wenhua 士与中国文化. Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin Chubanshe.
Yu, Y. 余英時. 2014. Dalu tichang Rujia shi siwang zhi wen 大陸提倡儒家是死亡之吻. Kaifangwang, 21 December 2014. Retrieved August 31, 2015 from http://www.open.com.hk/content.php?id=2180.
About this article
Cite this article
Kallio, J. Towards Confucian communalism: a match made in heaven?. Int. Commun. Chin. Cult 3, 427–442 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40636-016-0057-y
- Guwen guanzhi