China Quotes

“Of course, different people focus on different aspects of the private. For example, in America, conservatives often try to keep the government’s hand out of citizens’ pockets, while at the same time – in the case of moral conservatives – wanting it to get into people’s bedrooms; whereas liberals, on the other hand, strive to keep the government’s hand out of people’s bedrooms, while urging it to dip into people’s pockets. In spite of their different foci, both the Republic and many modern Western thinkers concentrate almost exclusively on conflicting aspects between the private and the public. Early Confucians also saw these, but they understood that the division between the two realms is not sharp, and that aspects of the private can be constructive in relation to the public interest. In particular, the family belongs to the private realm if we compare it to the community, but it belongs to the public realm when held against the mere self. Thus, to cultivate familial relations does not necessarily lead to the dominance of private interests over public. With this fundamental insight, the early Confucians’ solution to the conflict between the private and the public was not to suppress the private completely, but to cultivate its constructive aspects so as to overcome the ones in conflict with the public. The remedy for familialism is not abolition of the family, as the Republic appears to suggest, but cultivation of familial care, thereby extending the familial boundary and turning familial care into fully fledged compassion. It is interesting to note that the apparent ideal in the Republic is to make the whole city-state a big family by, paradoxically, abolishing the traditional family; in this big family, everyone is ‘a brother, or a sister, or a father, or a mother, or a son, or a daughter or their descendants or ancestors’ (Republic 463c; Bloom 1991: 143). But it is in China that this ideal has been realized. A sense of community and the perception of the state as a big family are deep in the Chinese psyche, due in large part to Confucian thought.”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom

“The modern Western tenet that certain choices are for an individual to make and the state should stay out of them presupposes that these choices are strictly private and will not cause harm to others. But if the distinction between the private and the public is in fact relative, and we are all interconnected with each other, then the above presupposition becomes highly questionable. Again, this does not mean that we should no longer protect the private realm; it simply suggests that this protection cannot be provided as straightforwardly as many believe.”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom

“As we have seen, people attribute the denigration of commerce to Confucianism. One simple reason for this (mis)understanding is their lack of appreciation of Confucian teachings. Moreover, even though it is hazardous to speculate on which school of traditional thought plays how much of a role in traditional Chinese culture, it is safe to say that certain dominant schools of thought have historically constituted, and may still constitute, the undercurrent of the Chinese mind. Thus, understanding such traditional political thought can help us grasp what is going on in the country today.”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom

“there might be better models for human beings living in modern times than today’s liberal democratic form of polity. But we will only be able to discover them if we adopt a perspective beyond the experience of Western modernity and its paradigms. If we are tempted to dismiss possible alternatives on the basis of the recent success of liberal democracy, we should remember the experience of the Chinese, who had far greater reason to dismiss other paradigms, given that China dominated the world economy for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.5 For in hindsight we see that the Chinese were fatally mistaken in their hubris, which led to defeat and devastation after China encountered the industrialized and colonizing West. We run the risk of repeating this folly if we once again allow ourselves to subscribe to theories of the end of history.”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom

“Empirical studies suggest that East Asians might think differently from Westerners, such as valuing material needs higher than abstract rights and democracy.2 But such differences could be the result of economic development. So-called East Asian values could be a consequence of the work ethic of the poor and needy, who are likely to consider food and shelter more important than certain abstract rights, or they could be the values of a more agrarian people – China, and East Asia generally, has a higher percentage of poor and agrarian people than the West. More importantly, these values are hardly Confucian. For example, a pupil asked Confucius: if we had to choose between food and trust among people, which one should we give up? Confucius answered: Give up food. Death has always been with us since the beginning of time, but when there is no trust the common people will not be able to stand on their feet. (Analects 12.7)”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom

“There are regular news reports in the Western media concerning the suppression of Tibetan culture by the Han Chinese (who constitute the majority of the Chinese people). This alleged suppression is often portrayed in racial or ethnic terms. However, generally speaking, the Western idea of nationality, in the sense of race, was alien to the Chinese throughout much of their history. More importantly, in the first thirty years of Communist rule, the Han Chinese did far more damage to their own culture (e.g. destruction of Confucian temples and of many other cultural heritage sites and institutions) than they did to Tibetan temples. In fact, much of the destruction of Tibetan temples was perpetrated by Tibetan radicals. So, the issue was not really racial or ethnic, but rather about radical modernizers versus traditionalists.”
― Tongdong Bai, China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom