China: Democracy, or Confucianism?
by
Xujun Eberlein (www.xujuneberlein.com)
徐軍，旅美專欄作家
Last October, when the CCP held its 17th congress, CNN reported the event with the headline
“China rules out copying Western democracy.” My first reaction to this headline was, So what?
That spontaneous reaction might have been an unconscious consequence of my reading Political
Confucianism by Jiang Qing (蔣慶), a cont共享會議室emporary Confucian in China. In this book, Jiang Qing
draws a blueprint for China’s political future based on Confucianism. It is the first such conception
since the 1919 May 4th movement that denounced the traditional Chinese ideology as a feudal
relic and began the age-old country’s modernization efforts.
往年十月，當中共十七年夜召開之際，american有線新聞網（CNN）對這次會議進行了報道，其所用標題為“中國不考慮效仿東方平易近主”。我對這個標題的第一反應是：既然不考慮效仿東方平易近主，那還有什么政治途講座場地徑可供選擇呢？這種下意識的反應，能夠與我曾經讀過蔣慶的《政治儒學》一書有關。蔣慶是中國當代儒家學者，他在這本書里，為中國未來的政治發展標的目的勾畫了一幅藍圖，這一藍圖即是中國今后的政治體制必須樹立在孔教政治上。這是自“五四”運動以來初次倡導傳統的政管理念，而“五四”運動曾將中國傳統的政管理念作為封建遺毒打垮，從此開始了陳舊中國的現代化盡力。
It seems typical of American thinking to regard either a republic or parliamentary democracy as
absolutely the only right model for all countries. For a political system to succeed, however, it
needs to be rooted in the particular country’s cultural history. Throughout thousands of years,
Ch1對1教學ina has never lacked great thinkers, political or philosophical. Which poses an interesting
舞蹈場地question: why does China need to adopt a Western model for its political system, be it Marxist
communism or capitalist democracy?
american人總是認為對于任何國家來說，共和制平易近主政體或議會制平易近主政體是絕對獨一正確的形式，這就是american人對待政治問題最典範的思維方法。可是，一個國家對一種政治體制的選擇要想獲得勝利，這種政治體制就必須植根于這一國家獨特的歷史文明傳統。幾千年來，無論在政治方面還是在哲學方面，中國都不缺少偉年夜的思惟家。這就引出一個饒風趣味的話題：為什么中國必須采用東方的形式來作為其政治體制呢？無論這種東方的形式是馬克思的共產主義還是資本主義的平易近主政治。
But it is true that China hasn’t had a great folk thinker like Confucius for quite some time.
Especially in the communist regime, th家教ere has been no soil for such a thinker to grow. This
frozen ground seems to have begun thawing lately. Jiang Qing’s Confucian orthodox thoughts, at
least, have not been subjecte共享會議室d to suppression yet.
不過，中國已經好久沒有出現過像孔子一樣偉年夜的平易近間思惟家了。特別是在共產主義體制下，最基礎就不成能有產生這種思惟家的泥土。不過，這種逝世氣沉沉的禁錮局勢比來開始發生松動，最起碼蔣慶正統的儒家思惟還沒有遭到當局的壓制舞蹈場地。
Among the contemporary Chinese scholars actively seeking solutions for their country’s future,
Jiang Qing is exceptional in that he investigated various philosophic schools and ideologies before
embracing Confucianism. As a 20-year-old soldier in the 1970s, with a mere middle school
education, he had taken a stab at Marx’s voluminous Capital. In 1980, an undergraduate student in
Southwest Politics and Law College, he was the first in the country to criticize Chinese
Communist practice as having abandoned the humanitarian essence of Marx’s early works. His
self-assigned, hand-written thesis “Return to Marx” spread apace in many universities, and
brought him years of political trouble.
蔣慶是積極尋求中國未來前途的中國當代眾多學者中的一員。在信仰儒家思惟以前，蔣慶就顯得與眾分歧，因為他曾深刻分歧的哲學思惟體系中尋找中國未來的前途。早在七十年月他當兵的歲月——那時他只要二十多歲，並且僅僅受過中學教導——就著迷于馬克思的《資本論》，并為其思惟深深打動。1980年，在就讀東北政法年夜學的時候，他就在中國起首批評中國的共產主義實踐背離了馬克思晚期著作中的人性主義精力。他本身散發的手寫論文《回到馬克思》很快在許多年夜學傳播，并是以給他帶來了多年的政治麻煩。
In his early 30s, Jiang Qing’s political predicament drove him first to existentialism and then
Buddhism. After his visit to the Shaolin Temple in 1984,個人空間 he shut himself up on Chongqing’s Gele
Mountain for four years to study Buddhist scriptures, eventually concluding that Buddhism solves
the “life and death” issue on the individual level, but provides inadequate guidance for national
political problems. Later he would find that, unlike Buddhism that teaches detachment from the
dusty real world, Confucianism has a long tradition of involvement in political construction, and
that would become the breakthrough point in Jiang Qing’s theoretical exploration.
早在蔣慶三十來歲時，政治上的窘境促使他信仰存在主義，繼而轉信釋教。在1984年游覽少林寺后，他就開始獨自一人呆在重慶歌樂山上研讀佛經。這樣長達四年之久，他最終意識到釋教所解決的是個人的“存亡”問題，對于國家的政治問題無所助益。最后他發現，與釋教教人脫離塵世分歧，孔教具有很是豐富長久的政治建構資源，孔教從來就是為政治供給積極指導的。這成了蔣慶理論摸索的衝破點。
Jiang Qing had also turned to Christianity, and translated several English books into Chinese,
including James Reid’s Facing Life with Christ and Louis Proal’s Political Crime. He was deeply
moved by Jesus’s spirit and attempted several times to join a Christian church in Shenzhen.
However, his attempts would not come to fruition as he felt “the entire Chinese culture dragging
my leg.” (Miwan: “B交流iography of Sensei Jiang Qing,” unpublished manuscript in Chinese)
在這一理論摸索之后，蔣慶也曾轉向基督教研討，并翻譯過幾本與基督教相關的英文書，此中有詹姆士•里德的《基督的人生觀》、路易斯•保羅的《政治的罪惡》。（譯者按：另有《政治神學文選》、《品德的人與不品德的社會》與多篇論文。）他曾經屢次被耶穌的救世精力所感動，也曾幾次試圖在深圳皈依基督教。但是，這最終沒有成為現實，因為在他試圖皈依基督教時感覺到“整個中國文明在把我往回拉。”（米灣：《蔣慶師長教師傳》，中文未出書稿。）
After all this exploration, only Confucianism makes him feel that he is at home and embracing his
destiny. This is not because Confucius, some 500 years older than Jesus, had 72 disciples while
Jesus had only 12; it is simply that cultural background has an indelible impact on one’s
ideological choice.
在經過多方摸索之后，只要儒家思惟讓蔣慶找到了歸宿感，并且注定了他的任務。這并不克不及簡單歸結為孔子這個人對他產會議室出租生瑜伽場地了影響，而是因為一個人思惟的構成注定要遭到他所處的文明佈景的深入影響。（孔子年夜約比耶穌早500年，并有72個門生，而耶穌只要12個門徒。）
In 2001, 48-year-old Jiang Qing quit his college teaching job and established a Confucian
seminary in the remote mountains of Guizhou. For three seasons of the year, except winter, Jiang
Qing dresses in the traditional long buttoned shirt, studies and teaches Confucianism in the
mountains without electricity or a cell phone signal, and pushes a nation-wide “children reading
Confucian classics” movement.
2001年，48歲的蔣慶放棄了他學校教師的任務教學，在貴州山區樹立了一所儒家書院。山上欠亨電，也沒有mobile_phone信號。在一年中除往冬天的三個季節里，蔣慶穿著傳統服裝，在山上研討并講授儒學，同時推動了全國范圍的兒童讀經運動。
Since 1989, Jiang Qing has published several scholarly books. Political Confucianism, available in
Chinese only, was published, with partial sponsorship from the Harvard-Yenching Institute, in
2004 by SDX Joint Publishing in Beijing. It has not been banned, though I couldn’t find it in
China’s bookstores during my visit last year. (The copy I read was lent to me by a friend.私密空間) On the
other hand, Jiang Qing’s plan to publish a collection of recent articles and speeches on Political
Confucianism was rejected this year.
1989年，蔣慶出書了幾本學術著作。《政治儒學》一書由北京三聯書店出書，并獲得了哈佛-燕京年夜學的部門資助。這本書只要中文版，它的出書并沒有遭到當局的制止，不過我往年在中國的書店里并沒有找到這本書。（我所讀的書是從伴侶那里借來的。）而蔣慶計劃出書的另一本關于“政治儒學”的書，是他近年來的論文和演講稿的文集。這本書在本年尚未能出書。
In his books and articles on political Confucianism, Jiang Qing calls for a restoration of
Confucianism as the state ideology, as it had been in many dynasties. Further, he outlines a
Confucian political structure strongly distinct from both Soviet-style communism and
Western-style democracy.
在關于政治儒學的書以及文章中，蔣慶呼吁恢復儒家思惟作為國家指導思惟的傳統位置。并且，他規劃了一套儒家政治體制架構，這套儒家的政治體制架構與蘇式的社會主義體制以及西式的平易近主政治體制完整分歧。
Democracy is Westernized and imperfect in nature, Jiang Qing points out. If applied to China, a
western style democratic system would have only one legitimacy –popular will個人空間, or civil legitimacy.
Such uni-legitimacy operates on the quantity of votes, regardless of the moral implications of
decisions taken. Since human desire is selfish by nature, those decisions can be self serving for a
particular majority’s interest. Because of this, Jiang Qing argues, civil legitimacy alone is not
sufficient to build or keep a constructive social order.
蔣慶認為，實施平易近主軌制實際上就是歐化，並且平易近主軌制自己就存在許多缺點。假如在中國實行平易近主軌制，那就只意味著實現平易近意一重符合法會議室出租規性。並且這獨一的符合法規性也是由投票的數量來實現的，并不論品德在人們做決定時的真正感化。既然人的愿看在天性上是自利的，那么通過投票所做出的決定也只能是自利的，即這一決定只能照顧到這一參與投票的特定多數人的好處。所以，蔣慶認為：平易近意一重符合法規性沒有充足的才能往建構戓維護一個完美的社會次序。
The uni-legitimacy criticism makes senses to me because western countries, which have evolved
the concepts of sufferance, law, tolerance and community standards over hundreds of years, have
a broad 1對1教學base for governance. China, on the other hand, does not have this same evolution. Western
democracy simply dropped onto China is likely to face pitfalls parallel to those seen in Iraq. The
foundation of majority rule alone is not sufficient to provide good governance.
蔣慶對平易近意符合法規性一重獨年夜的批評使我認識到，因為東方國家花了幾百年的時間發展出了忍受、法制、寬容與團體精力這些觀念，而這些觀念才成了當局的堅固基礎。可是，中國并沒有同樣的發展歷程。假如把東方的平易近主軌制簡單地套用到中國社會，則共享空間很能夠出現類似于在伊拉克所發生的那種問題。單純的多數決定原則并不克不及充足達致一個好的當局。
In contrast, the Confucian state Jiang proposes is tri-legitimate: it carries numinous, historical, and
civil legitimacy simultaneously. In particular, the governmental body consists of three mutually
constraining institutions that represent religion (members chosen through community
recommendation and Confucian examination), cultural tradition (members based on sovereign and
sage lineage and by appointment), and popular will (members elected), respectively. Jiang Qing
believes that such a structure would avoid many of the mistakes that appear inevitable under a
uni-legitimate 瑜伽教室system.
與平易近意一重符合法規性相對應，蔣慶倡導的孔教國家具有三重符合法規性：包含神圣的符合法規性、歷史的符合法規性與平易近意的符合法規性。具體說來，國家體制由三個彼此制衡的機構組成，這三個機構分別是代表宗教的通儒院（成員由公共社團推薦，并通過儒家的考試選拔產生）、代表歷史文明的國體院（成員通過錄用，由歷史上的君主及圣賢后代組成）、代表平易近意的百姓院（成員由普選產生）。蔣慶信任這樣一種結構可以防止一重符合法規性軌制下產生的種種弊病。
The above ideas can be traced back to a Confucian concept: “The sovereign rules through the
heaven, the earth, and the people.” The Chinese had thousands of years of tradition with these
elements in their political systems, and of all the great ancient cultures, China is unique in having
survived with recognizable continuity.
上述思惟來源于“霸道參通天、地、人”的孔教理念。中國人的這種政治觀念存在于他們陳舊的政治軌制中，有著幾千年的歷史傳統，並且在一切的偉年夜古文明體中，中國是公認的獨一一向延續下來的文明體。
Jiang Qing’s idea of political Confucianism has found as many advocates as dissenters. Followers
honor him as “the greatest Contemporary Confucian,” while dissenters accuse him of being a
“benighted cultural conservative.” Jiang Qing says he accepts both titles without the modifiers.
對于蔣慶的“政治儒學”思惟，有許多人贊成，也有許多人反對。追隨者尊稱他為“當代年夜儒”，而反對者則指責其為“原教旨主義”。蔣慶說他對這兩種教學場地評價都不介懷。
The website of China Daily, a government-run English newspaper, published an article o家教n January
6, 2006 titled “Confucianism will never be relig講座場地ion [sic].” It concludes, “Religion as a stat小樹屋e power,
as Jiang advocates, should never be allowed, not in this country.”
2006年1月6日，在由當局主辦的英文報紙《中國日報》的網站上，登載了一篇題為“儒家思惟絕不克不及成為宗教”的文章。這篇文章的結論是；“蔣慶所宣傳的國教，絕不會允許在這個國家成為現實。”
Chen Lai, China’s top Confucianism scholar and professor of philosophy at Beijing University,
welcomes the new departure in political Confucianism research conducted by Jiang Qing. In fact,
he helped to have Political Confucianism published. Still, he considers the suggestion that
Confucianism become the state ideology, let alone a basis for government, impractical. In my chat
with Chen Lai when he visited Harvard Universit交流y last year, he shook head at the theology that
does not separate state and church.
中國有名的儒家學者、北京年夜學哲學系傳授陳來，認可蔣慶所提出的“政治儒學”的新思緒。《政治儒學》一書就是在他的幫助下出書的。不過，陳來認為將儒家思惟作為國家獨一的意識形態是不現實的。往年陳來訪問哈佛年夜教學學時，我曾同他進行交通，他對政教不分的思惟搖頭。
On the other h瑜伽場地and, Daniel A. Bell, an Oxford-educated Canadian scholar and professor of
philosophy at Tsinghua University in Beijing, deems that “it is not entirely fanciful to surmise that
the Chinese Communist Party will be relabeled the Chinese Confucian Party in a few years time.”
牛津年夜學畢業的加拿年夜人、現為北京清華年夜學哲學系傳授的貝淡寧卻認為，中國共產黨在未來的幾年內變成“中國儒家黨”并不是不成能的。
There is in fact a sign that China’s current leaders have begun to encourage the revival of
Confucianism. President Hu Jingtao教學 has alluded to Confucius’ teaching in various speeches – a
gesture toward the return to traditional value that was not seen in his predecessors. This tendency
was again displayed in CCP’s 17th Congress.
種種跡象表白，今朝中國的領導人已經在開始鼓勵儒學的復興。國家主席胡錦濤在屢次演講中間接提到孔子的教導，而這種回歸傳統價值的姿態并沒有在他的後任身上有所表現。這種回歸傳統的傾向也表現在中共十七年夜當中。
It is a welco共享會議室me change, displaying a small degree of tolerance that has been lacking. But it is a far
cry from the Confucian state proposed by Jiang Qing.
當局由對傳統文明排擠到表現出必定水平的包涵，這是一個值得贊許的轉變。但對于蔣慶所倡導的孔教國家，還有一段漫長的過程。
Last summer in Beijing I had a conversation with Miwan, a disciple and friend of Jiang Qing’s and
a professor himself in a renowned Chinese university. When asked what he thou聚會場地ght of the
feasibility of Jiang Qing’s ideal, Miwan said, “To a great thinker, feasibility does not have to be an
immediate concern. Sensei Jiang is a great thinker.” All of Jiang’s disciples and followers
reverently refer to him as “Jiang xiansheng” – sensei Jiang, whether in front of o瑜伽場地r behind him. This
is a practice of the Confucian “respecting the teacher, valuing the tao” tradition, in sharp contrast
to the behavior of today’s irreverent young generation. To a Chinese history addict like me, the
reappearance of this long-abandoned reverence for a teacher is heart warming.
往年炎天，我在北京同米灣作過一次交通，他是蔣慶的門生及道友，一所中國著名年夜學的傳授。當問及他對蔣慶思惟可行性的見解時，他說：“對一個偉年夜的思惟家來說，可行性并不是起首需求考慮的。而蔣師長教師恰是一個偉年夜的思惟家。” 無論是對面還是背后，蔣慶的門生及其追隨者都尊重地稱蔣慶為“蔣師長教師”。這是儒家“師之地點，道之所存”的傳統。這種尊重的行為與明天毫無尊重感的年輕一代的行為構成了顯明的對比。作為一個對中國歷史著迷的人，能看到久違的師道尊嚴的再現，我心中是覺得很是溫熱的。
In an email to me later, Miwan summarizes his association with Jiang Qing by using a classic
phrase, “Though unreachable, my heart longs.”
在比來的電子郵件中，米灣用一句經典中的話歸納綜合了他與蔣慶的來往：“雖不克不及至，心向往之。”
After Jiang Qing returned his home in Shenzhen for winter last year, I emailed h舞蹈教室im asking what he
was busy on. He replied, “Reading all day long, nothing more.” I asked what he thought of the
potential for Confucianism to become the state ideology. “I’m not optimistic,” he said, “I’m afraid
it might have to wait for several decades.”
往年冬天，蔣慶回到他在深圳的家中時，我通過電子郵件問他正在忙什么，他回復道：“終日讀書罷了。”當我問到他對孔教成為國家指導思惟能夠性的見解時，他說：“我并不樂觀，能夠要等上幾十年。”
Well, that is optimistic.
這么說來，還是可以等待的。
（徐軍，旅美專欄作家，本文發表于american有名英文網刊THE CHINA BEAT，并由american多家有名中國問題英文網刊鏈接轉載。）
戊子端午前 心蘭謹譯于陽明精舍何言居
發佈留言