|
Thus, it can be plausibly argued within the Confucian framework that an ordinary person should have some right in discussing and deciding public issues that will ultimately touch upon his life, and many such issues might be plain enough to be understood by a common mind with reasonable education.Further, to become a gentleman presupposes a set of favorable social and political conditions, which had been denied to most ordinary men and women in traditional China.A person need be given the basic education and some opportunity for practice before he can intelligently participate in government.Without these opportunities, he will most likely remain a uneducated and underdeveloped “littleman”--not because he wishes to remain politically ignorant and incompetent, but because he lacks the fortune (at least a reasonably wealthy family, among other things) that is beyond his control but is nevertheless necessary for his moral development.Since the mass of people were deprived of the opportunity to become morally developed gentlemen, the apparently “just” system of merit was based ultimately on injustice.In this sense, a social and political system that guarantees a minimum right--to participate in government or otherwise--seems to provide more fairness because it can afford relatively equal opportunity for personal development of innate virtues.
Still, the notion of “rights” does not so easily fit with the dignity of a Confucian gentleman.The problem of rights lies deeper in the Chinese practice, for even a gentleman seemed to have only duties, but no reciprocal rights, before his parents, rulers and society in general.Somehow it appears inadequate--even distasteful--to a gentleman to fight for his own rights and interests, especially in the form of factions and parties, for “a gentleman is dignified, but does not wrangle”.
It is true that the Confucian duties are never unilateral, but always reciprocal.
Thus, the king and his subjects have their own duties to perform toward each other.And, if a duty (e.g., benevolence of a king) is insisted and recognized by every member of the society, then it is in effect transformed into a kind of right toward the recipient of its performance.But, in practice, such condition is hardly ever met.Generally, in a relationship between two unequal parties, the moral persuasion of duty alone is seldom sufficient to prevent the powerful party from abusing its power.As a result, contrary to equilibrium and harmony as prescribed by the Principle of the Mean, the imbalance of power frequently took place in the Chinese political history.During that period, no matter how dignified a gentleman was in private life, his dignity would disappear before the state, against which he had no protection.
Even private complaints must be made with caution, as Confucius himself taught: “When good government prevails in a state, one should speak and act boldly.When bad government prevails, act righteously, but speak with reserve”;
|
