FREE ESSAY ON CHAGNON DEBATE

CHAGNON DEBATE

Confucian Doctrine in Modern Society
Robert Bruce's article titled "The Return to Confucius?" asserts that Confucianism may be
the answer to Asian economic strife. However, he fails to draw a clear link between
economic prosperity and Confucianism, instead leaving the reader to hypothesize using the
information given in the article, and, in our case, the Analects.
I believe the message he is trying to convey is that a nation living in harmony is an
economically prosperous one. This he supports with references to imperial China such as
Matteo Ricci who, as Bruce states, "brought a vision of harmony, equality, scholarship
and education, which the Enlightenment of Europe regarded with awe and admiration." What
Bruce neglects to mention is that China had little exposure to the Western world at that
point in history and was not greatly influenced by Western culture until relatively
recently. 
China's bloody entrance into the global economy finally came in the form of the Opium War
and consequently, foreign spheres of influence. The British and French spheres in
particular provided a catalyst to the Westernization of China. Confucian ideals were
repressed and ridiculed along with any other unique aspect of Chinese culture. The
economy once based firmly on the ideals Bruce writes about was crushed by the brute force
of capitalism.
As Bruce so kindly points out, the Communist Revolution in China followed soon after,
and, while it had little support from Europe, Mao and Stalin became close and they
prospered from one another for a time. China was also forced into a system spawned by a
far more Western train of thought than it was accustomed to - a system that, more often
than not, was at war with Confucianism rather than utilizing it. Bruce implies that China
and several surrounding countries are now basking in their own Confucianism and it is
yielding enormous economic dividends. Yet again, Bruce fails to point out that there have
been entire generations raised on an anti-Confucian doctrine. Though Chinese culture may
yet have remnants of Confucianism so ingrained in it that no dictator, no matter how
brutal, could stamp out, many Chinese don't and, in all likelihood, won't accept many of
K'ung Fu-tzu's ideas and teachings. The propaganda of the Cultural Revolution won't soon
be erased.
Even if Confucianism was observed as it once was in imperial China, an economy based upon
Confucian ethics would be short lived. As stated in Bruce's article, capitalism is now
being encouraged in the People's Republic, and capitalism is clearly not conducive to
Confucianism or communism, which is one of the few political systems in which an ideal
form of Confucianism could thrive. Capitalism awards greed (was that a little too blunt
Mr. Cherin? … hehehe), thus a capitalist economic system operating under
Confucianism is very easily abused and therefore leaves little room for human error. 
A capitalist force - the USA, currently dominates the global economy. This affects the
theory Bruce puts forward in his article in two very important ways. First, it creates a
situation in which a less powerful, "communist" nation such as China has an infinitesimal
chance at success in the global market unless it allows room for capitalism, and, second,
unless the Confucian Revolution (you like that one? - I'm a poet and I'm going to make
sure everyone knows it) is a world wide phenomenon, it cannot be successful in the long
term because capitalism will eradicate it, and even if it is, it is would be highly
unstable due to the aforementioned reasons. This makes Confucianism and economic
prosperity well-nigh mutually exclusive.
It seems as though the connection that Robert Bruce tells of between Confucianism and
Asia's newfound economic success is either fictitious or ephemeral. Bruce's article is in
desperate need of a logical justification of the claim he puts forth, without it, the
theory is easily torn down, and the article itself sounds weak. It appears as though a
stable economic system with Confucianism at its base could exist only while two things
are occurring simultaneously - the economic system in place is in accordance with
Confucian ideals, and this system is universal. If one of these components is not present
I don't believe economic prosperity under Confucianism is possible, and that the only
reason that it once was is that imperial China had only an inconsequential amount of
communication with the remainder of the world, making it, in effect, universal.