CONFUCIANISM AND THE RULER-SUBJECT RELATIONSHIP

Yesterday I treated the relationship between father and son as one of the five relationships discussed by Mencius. Today I will deal with the relationship between ruler and subject.

Duty and righteousness should guide a ruler’s conscience, according to Mencius. When personal profit or other selfish motivations lead to the abuse of power, a ruler violates the sacred trust owed the public. Mencius believed in the division of labor. Some people, like farmers, work with their hands. Other people, like those in government, work with their minds. The work is different, but all should show dedication to their respective duties. Trouble ensues when those in power neglect their obligations to the people, instead using their tenure in office to enrich themselves or live the easy life (Wei-ming, 1993, pp.187-189).

Comparing the ruler-subject relationship to that between father and son, Mencius notes that the blood bonds are absent in the former. Therefore, the more reason rulers should foster a reciprocal association with their subjects. In other words, rulers are responsible for earning the respect and support of the people. Mutual affection between ruler and subject should prevail, as it should in the father-son relationship. The chain grows larger. From self-transformation to father-son to ruler-subject, Mencius system of ethics is an attempt to improve the individual, the family, and the state in a continuous rational sequence (Wei-ming, 1993, pp.188-189).

I agree with Mencius that those responsible for governing (including all government workers) must be conscientious persons. He does not mention that the governed should freely elect those who govern. In those days, I guess it was inconceivable. Either lineage or conquest decided who ruled. The people had no choice but to try to work with the latest occupant of the throne and his ministers.

It is a shame that in our world today, we still have tyrants, dictators, monarchs, theocratic, and communist states. Such repressive beings and entities stay in power by imposing their will on their poor subjects. The use of force, coercion, censorship, and the denial of other basic human rights allows them to maintain a tight grip on the reins of government. They are nothing but vermin infesting the corridors of palatial buildings where good will and justice should reign. Cuba, Syria, Iran, North Korea and China are some of those wickedl antihuman regimes. Venezuela and Bolivia are trying to join the nefarious group.

Those who think that China should not be included in that group, think again. Economic prosperity does not equal liberty and human rights. Politically, they are as backwards and dangerous as they were when the despot Mao ruled. The people are not free in China. They recently imposed stricter measures on foreign media, all in the name of national unity and social stability. Right, the Communist party there does not want the Chinese people to read or hear news that are critical of their omnipresent rule. They do not want anybody reminding the Chinese people they are not free. The name of that country is a total lie. There is no “People’s Republic of China.” Just ask those who were at Tiananmen Square in 1989. The country belongs to the Communist party and those who collaborate with the regime.

Wake up, democratic world! Know thyself and know thy enemies. Learn to oppose them wherever they show their ugly faces (Hugo Chávez, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sure ain’t pretty, for example). Let them accuse us of being imperialists, hypocrites that they are, as if their goal were not to create an evil empire on Earth. If anyone should rule our planet, it should be the forces of democracy, not they. Under us, citizens have the guarantee of freedom, equality, and human rights. Under them, they never will.

Bibliography: Wei-ming, T. (1993). Confucianism. In Arvind Sharma (Ed.) Our Religions (pp.141-227). New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

Suggested Reading: Ercian Testament - Part Three, chapter 27 “Proligion Revisited.”