What might a viable political alternative to liberal democracy look like? In Against Political Equality, Tongdong Bai offers a possibility inspired by Confucian ideas.
Bai argues that domestic governance influenced by Confucianism can embrace the liberal aspects of democracy along with the democratic ideas of equal opportunities and governmental accountability to the people. Bu...
What might a viable political alternative to liberal democracy look like? In Against Political Equality, Tongdong Bai offers a possibility inspired by Confucian ideas.
Bai argues that domestic governance influenced by Confucianism can embrace the liberal aspects of democracy along with the democratic ideas of equal opportunities and governmental accountability to the people. But Confucianism would give more political decision-making power to those with the moral, practical, and intellectual capabilities of caring for the people. While most democratic thinkers still focus on strengthening equality to cure the ills of democracy, the proposed hybrid regime—made up of Confucian-inspired meritocratic characteristics combined with democratic elements and a quasi-liberal system of laws and rights—recognizes that egalitarian qualities sometimes conflict with good governance and the protection of liberties, and defends liberal aspects by restricting democratic ones. Bai applies his views to the international realm by supporting a hierarchical order based on how humane each state is toward its own and other peoples, and on the principle of international interventions whereby humane responsibilities override sovereignty.
Exploring the deficiencies posed by many liberal democracies, Against Political Equality presents a novel Confucian-engendered alternative for solving today’s political problems.Tongdong Bai is the Dongfang Professor of Philosophy at Fudan University in Shanghai and a Global Professor of Law at New York University School of Law. His books include China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom.
Tongdong Bai is the Dongfang Professor of Philosophy at Fudan University in Shanghai and a Global Professor of Law at New York University School of Law. His books include China: The Political Philosophy of the Middle Kingdom.
Imagined or not, the idea of blood relations is intuitive and strong, more so than, for example, the kind of state identity offered by the Confucian idea of hierarchical care. Since it treats all people in it as a big family, a nation-state can have a strong motivation to protect its people, and even promote individuals' rights within the state. This kind of protection and promotion can facilitate the creativity of the individual and the community: But in the benefits of this model also lie its drawbacks. The bond is strong in this kind of nationstate because it is using blood relations, and blood relations are exclusive. A person of a different race(nation )can never become a citizen of this nationand other states and other people are forever the other. As a result, the conflict of intere... (查看原文)
This kind of nation-state can appear to be self-contradictory in another way(than the aforementioned contradiction between cosmopolitanism within and nationalism without): it can be humane to its own and tyrannical to the aliens. A good example of this is King Leopold II of Belgium, who was a promoter ofrights and liberties in Belgium and of brutal colonization and mass killings in Africa. As Jack Donnelly puts it, the nation-state is both the" principal violator and essential protector "of human rights. But if we understand the logic of this version of the nation-state, there is nothing contradictory between these two sides of a nation-state.
In contrast, as I argued earlier in this chapter, the Confucian model
acknowledges the(conditional ) sovereignty and sanctity of individual states ... (查看原文)
The History of This Book 【问题意识】Upon reflection, I realize that the 2009 book is fundamentally “reactive.” Its underlying rationale is that liberal democracy is dominant today, and so for Confucianism to be relevant to the contemporary world, it has ...
(展开)
白彤东 作者
理一分殊
6 有用 希望炒菜不崩油 2020-05-17 11:40:44
是不是学中国哲学的理论都很圆滑，我认可这本书所构建的儒家式政制在理论上解决了所有政治问题，但是这种乌托邦怎么可能会实现呢？没有考虑到历史现实因素的影响，理论就会显得天真。如果以中国新加坡作为可现实化的论据，那么这不就是和具体的文化历史背景相关吗？那么这种对西方自由民主制的批评又有何益处呢？ 此外，就哲学旨趣来看，大陆新儒家的政治哲学方向确实有新意，但其理论本身的预设存在问题。很简易的反驳，如果人民... 是不是学中国哲学的理论都很圆滑，我认可这本书所构建的儒家式政制在理论上解决了所有政治问题，但是这种乌托邦怎么可能会实现呢？没有考虑到历史现实因素的影响，理论就会显得天真。如果以中国新加坡作为可现实化的论据，那么这不就是和具体的文化历史背景相关吗？那么这种对西方自由民主制的批评又有何益处呢？ 此外，就哲学旨趣来看，大陆新儒家的政治哲学方向确实有新意，但其理论本身的预设存在问题。很简易的反驳，如果人民声称自己的福祉是一人一票，是政治平等，那么白该如何回应呢？我想回应大概就是善意的谎言吧，但这在现代化背景下又何其可笑。 (展开)
3 有用 笔记本强迫症 2020-08-30 17:11:24
观点有点勉强了，感觉儒家学说和现代民主制度并没有太大干系。但有点说对了，自由和平等本身就是矛盾体，现代西方社会民主的闹剧就是佐证。
1 有用 东林遗孤 2024-10-26 13:08:07 美国
1.所有新儒家的建设性意见都与代议制民主已经有的措施重合，毫无新意；2.新儒家的政治主张和给出的措施自相矛盾，即使实行也会自取灭亡；3.对政治理论的工具主义认识无法触及规范性合法性问题的本质；4.与Bell著作相比采用了更加极端的等级制本体论，从而使作为特殊案例的中国实践上升为了普遍性的规范理论，造成了更大的国际笑话；5.对自己正确性的论述依赖于“自由主义也干了”的逻辑，但列举的西方理论家都不是自... 1.所有新儒家的建设性意见都与代议制民主已经有的措施重合，毫无新意；2.新儒家的政治主张和给出的措施自相矛盾，即使实行也会自取灭亡；3.对政治理论的工具主义认识无法触及规范性合法性问题的本质；4.与Bell著作相比采用了更加极端的等级制本体论，从而使作为特殊案例的中国实践上升为了普遍性的规范理论，造成了更大的国际笑话；5.对自己正确性的论述依赖于“自由主义也干了”的逻辑，但列举的西方理论家都不是自由主义者；6.很难想象这样一群看不起普通人的精英真执政了会不会如他们所说一样为民服务；7.在鄙视平民的同时，似乎忘了自己学派无非也是。。。搞得好像meritocracy真实现了会和你们有关一样 (展开)
1 有用 达伦终结者 2025-01-18 07:54:29 北京
中文版的附录值得看看，第九章也是。正经的讲制度设计的部分非常奇怪，核心主张基于非常强的经验问题（民众素质差），但是没有文中没有详细的讨论现有的经验研究，就随便引用了两下Caplan就过去了，也没有考虑陪审团定理及其诸多变体的问题。整体上对当代英语的d theory的参与也很少，重要的是没有澄清和考虑：（1）自己理论和大陆货的epistocracy之间的区别和优劣；（2）标准的对epistocrac... 中文版的附录值得看看，第九章也是。正经的讲制度设计的部分非常奇怪，核心主张基于非常强的经验问题（民众素质差），但是没有文中没有详细的讨论现有的经验研究，就随便引用了两下Caplan就过去了，也没有考虑陪审团定理及其诸多变体的问题。整体上对当代英语的d theory的参与也很少，重要的是没有澄清和考虑：（1）自己理论和大陆货的epistocracy之间的区别和优劣；（2）标准的对epistocracy的反驳。我还会觉得不考虑proceduralist/non-instrumental的论证是有些奇怪的，特别是考虑到白对**剩余部分的喜爱，至少应该加上一部分对instrumentalism的说明会更好，特别我很好奇白本人会怎么讲这件事，是用一个Arneson类似的说法，还是搞出一个儒家的。 (展开)
4 有用 在野武将 2020-11-18 16:53:57
陆陆续续读完了。说几点感受：1. 比贝汪那书还是认真、真诚许多。2 书中对liberal democracy 的规范性基础的诊断过于单薄。3 关于儒家，作者打破了传统上或“照着讲”或“接着讲”的局限，发展出了第三条道路：“我来讲。” 4 综上，我觉得写成乌托邦小说效果应该更好：比如一个来自liberal democratic society的人，来到了作者心中的国度。（可惜这种体裁很久以来比较老套... 陆陆续续读完了。说几点感受：1. 比贝汪那书还是认真、真诚许多。2 书中对liberal democracy 的规范性基础的诊断过于单薄。3 关于儒家，作者打破了传统上或“照着讲”或“接着讲”的局限，发展出了第三条道路：“我来讲。” 4 综上，我觉得写成乌托邦小说效果应该更好：比如一个来自liberal democratic society的人，来到了作者心中的国度。（可惜这种体裁很久以来比较老套。） (展开)