The conception of ‘westernisation’ is continually associated with the ideas of modernism, progressivism and liberalism. This dynamic has, and continues to, shape our historical and contemporary understanding, as the west symbolises a global benchmark for other peoples and societies. One of the more interesting points that seems to be downplayed in general western discourse is disillusionment with the west, a particularly interesting theme in this week’s reading: Confucian Renewals. Another fascinating notion was the conception of “easternisation” and its emphasis on Confucianism as a major component in establishing a reinvigorated western society with eastern influences. The concept of Confucianism and utopianism, or at least post-modernism, in conjunction with reconstructing western or global society shall form the basis of this discussion. The two specific readings I have chosen are, Qing Jiang’s Confucian constitutionalist order and Robert Neville’s Boston Confucianism, I believe highlight radically alternate perspectives on how to construct this new Confucian society from a western and globalist standpoint. Neville’s takes a liberal outlook illustrating how to integrate Confucian values while respecting the multicultural and cosmopolitan nature of the west. Jiang, on the other hand, has no time for such formalities and is quick to assert Confucianism’s dominance while still integrating notions of western democracy and liberalism.
Neville is quick to detach Confucianism from politics, as he outlines that Confucianism has failed because of politcal context of the societies that implement Confucianism rather than Confucianism itself.[1] Therefore, implementing Confucian ideals in western society will not incite traditionalism or conservatism as Confucianism is so often accused of, especially from the feminist community.[2] On the contrary by adopting Confucianism and specifically its ideals surrounding civility and the practice of ritual, western society, according to Neville, will be greatly enhanced.[3] For Boston Confucians civility and ritual act as the founding fabric that can help solve many of the issues multiculturalism brings. For example, Boston Confucians have highlighted that, by committing to cultural diversity, there is a need in the West to create positive social rituals as a means to respect the social diversity.[4] However, although this has been acknowledged, Boston Confucianism has only offered a diagnosis and is yet to provide the cure. Additionally, the civility Confucianism offers needs to be adapted further as it is a conception of a mesocratic society needs to expand beyond the working world and appreciate the complexity and variety of modern social roles, from work to home.[5] This is something too that Boston Confucianism lacks any practical framework on.
Jiang, on the other hand, takes an entirely different approach as he looks to incorporate western connotational liberalism and the Chinese regime into his new world Confucian society.[6] Jiang does want to achieve a western style of democracy, however this seems rather hollow when he quickly declares a hierarchical society based on the rule of a singular Confucian ancestor.[7] The ailments of Western society, democracy based on people’s legitimacy, that Jiang so vigorously wants to cure is stripped of all purpose with his autocratic replacement. He too then looks to offer a Confucian solution to a western issue but, as witnessed with the Boston Confucians, fails when the practicality of these ideas are analysed.
A recurring theme throughout this module has been to understand the discourse the follows when theoretical abstract ideas come into practice with the realities of world. Although, both the above ideas have not been implemented in the west or the east it is still interesting to debate how viable these ideas are and where their greatest pitfalls may lie, as Bell and Neville have done. However, as evidenced from all the weekly readings to date, the discourse that would follow from their implementation can never truly be realised until they have indeed clashed with reality.
[1] Robert C. Neville, ‘Boston Confucianism: Portable tradition in the late-modern world’ New York press: 2000, p. XXIII-XXIV
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid p. 10
[4] Ibid p. 16
[5] Ibid p. 17
[6] Qing Jiang, Daniel Bell, Ruiping Fan & Edmund Ryden, ‘A Confucian constitutional order: how China’s ancient past can shape its political future’ Princeton University Press, 2012, P. 3
[7] Ibid pp. 7-8