What Can Confucius Teach Us About Today's Controversies?

Good evening. Uh, welcome, welcome to Asia Society. Um, Hong Kong Center is so glad to see all of you here tonight for tonight's program. Um, uh, I've been away for about a couple of weeks and uh, having been in the States for the last two weeks, I am so glad to be back in Hong Kong. I, I almost kissed the ground when I landed in Hong Kong, uh, uh, yesterday morning. And it's just that, you know, there's a lot of craziness. I was in London. Uh, I was there, I think they were getting ready for, um, a major protest, and I, I, we just kind of stumbled on into it. Uh, so Hong Kong, uh, besides the weather, which I'm not complaining, considering it was really, really cold in London and also New York. So, hence this cold that I caught, uh, for about two weeks now. So, I'm now that I'm back in Hong Kong, I know I will be well and so really glad to see so many of you here tonight.

Um, I've been looking forward to this book, uh, when, uh, Professor Bell, uh, approached us a few, uh, months ago, and I think it's a topic that, uh, is really, I think, very appropriate for for now because, as you know, Asia Society, we've done programs on the trap with, uh, uh, Kevin Rudd's book, and we've been hearing a lot about Western political philosophy in this current, uh, climate. And, uh, so it's really good to hear a bit about Chinese philosophy, and to kind of, especially with Professor Bell's, uh, impressive, uh, uh, CV, having, uh, taught, uh, not only here at Hong Kong U, but also in China and other parts of the world. So, we're delighted that the book is fresh off the press. Um, if it's sold out, uh, we're going to get more copies, and you'll get more information on how to get the, um, uh, the book.

Uh, so the topic is "Ancient Wisdom, Modern China: Political Ideas That Endure." And I've been personally very interested in the topic because, uh, my Chinese last name is M. Uh, we're direct descendants of M. And that's something I'm very, very proud of. And in fact, it was about 20 years ago, um, I had a chance to go to, uh, Qufu and Zoucheng, uh, uh, Zoucheng, home of M, and also, uh, Qufu, home of Confucius, with my father. And it was a wonderful trip because I think my dad knew more about Chinese history than the local guide. So, it was a special trip. And for me, I've always been interested in Chinese philosophy. In fact, it's something that if I have time, I would love, love to be able to do some courses at Hong Kong U and study with Professor Bell. And I think the book is timely, and, uh, and I'm sure that's why all of you are here, uh, tonight.

And I'm also particularly, um, grateful to Carolyn Yim, uh, Asia 21 Fellow, who's based here, uh, and who writes and studies a lot about, uh, uh, culture and arts, uh, and has written quite a bit of opinion pieces recently. So, we're really delighted that Carolyn, uh, can be here to, uh, moderate this, um, this, this discussion. And so, with that, I'm really delighted that, uh, Professor Daniel Bell, Professor, Chair of Political Theory at the University of Hong Kong, uh, is going to be here, uh, and with Carolyn to get our program started. And, uh, there will be plenty of time for Q&A. And also, uh, we hope that if you are not yet a member, I'm sure many of you are, uh, please consider, uh, becoming a member of Asia Society Hong Kong. So, with that, I'm going to invite Professor Bell and Carolyn to get the program started. Thank you.

Testing. Okay. How's your mic?

Testing.

Fantastic. It's good to see everyone here tonight. Everyone looks very cool and crisp despite the weather. So, thank you for making time and coming to hear Professor Bell's fantastic book, which was published only a month ago. So, we can't wait to dive in. But before we do, I have a very cheesy joke for all of you, which is going to be this. So, Confucius say, "Please don't kill me." Confucius say, "Man who walks into elevator has high expectations." My parents are here in the audience tonight. So, let's hope that their expectations are met by what will be our conversation that will go on.

Um, so, without further ado, Professor Bell, he is currently a Hong Kong U professor, the Chair, in fact, of the Political Theory Department. Um, moreover, he has previously been the Dean of Shandong University, Professor at Tsinghua's Schwarzman College, studied at McGill and also at Oxford. So, clearly, quite the resume and the academic prestige cut from the Confucian scholar tradition. Um, we have a lot of expectations to meet as students of yours. But I really wanted to start by asking about how you came to write this book and what was the inspiration for it.

Um, thank you, um, Carolyn, and also thank you, Alice and Dorothy, for organizing this. Um, I'm very grateful to be here. And let me set low expectations, please. Um, so this book, the idea for this book actually started before I had any experience with China. Because my first job was in Singapore in 1991, and I was asked to teach a course on political theory. And the previous, uh, professor had used all the Western stuff, but I thought it was a bit strange because in Singapore, we have, you know, we have people from ethnic Chinese heritage, ethnic Indian heritage, ethnic Malay heritage. So, I thought, well, it makes sense to look at other traditions too. And then the more I looked at other traditions, I thought, well, this is fascinating. I mean, China has great political theorizing. So does India. So does Islam. And then I thought, um, it would be interesting to write a book on comparative political theory that covers all these great traditions. And my editor at Princeton University Press in 2022 agreed. And I, and I have a, and I had a contract to write that book. But 24 years later, I never wrote that book because it was just so difficult. But finally, when I narrowed it down to Chinese political theory, especially before the unification of China by Qin Shi Huang in, uh, 221 BCE, that's when all the great debates took place that have their enduring legacy: the Legalists and the Confucians and the Mohists and the Daoists. And then it made sense to put them in dialogue with each other. Um, and, uh, you know, I mean, you know, it's people, is there really influence on today? Well, I, I mean, think of, you know, if you want to understand Israel, you have to understand the Jewish tradition, right? If you understand Iran, you have to understand Islamic tradition. If you understand the US, it helps to understand Christianity as well. If you understand China, you have to understand these great traditions and how they influence, uh, contemporary China. So then I thought, well, it's a good idea to put these great traditions in dialogue with each other, as they were in the, you know, in the Warring States period, especially when these guys are arguing with each other in a very kind of, you know, extremely forceful way, and having them argue about timeless issues. And then I tried it out on my students at the University of Hong Kong for three years, and what they found interesting, what they didn't, and then I, and that helped me to to write the book that hopefully is in a kind of accessible and even entertaining, arguably.

That absolutely makes sense. I was just telling you over coffee just now that at my university, we had to study the foundational course of our core curriculum was all of political theory and history starting from Plato, and then you have, you know, Toqueville, Hobbes, but very little in the Eastern tradition, let alone anything outside of Western tradition. So, we're really glad to have this book as a starter. And I must admit my ignorance that I didn't know much about Legalism or Moism before. So, I tried to make a very simple take for the audience that's a bit Gen Z-coded to understand what that is. Confucianism, and you can also critique me if this is wrong. Confucianism, as I know it, is I call it duty-mongering, and very kind of one particular way you should do things. Daoism, I call it like laying flat, very zen, very stoic, going with the flow. Legalism is like very Machiavellian, very Hobbesian. And lastly, Moism is very utilitarian, maximizing, and that's like the effective altruist, very John Stuart Mill and Bentham. How my primer, perhaps maybe imperfect, but can you tell us your primer of these four schools that you talk about in your book?

Yeah, I, I think, um, I, I don't disagree. Um, but the thing about the Confucian tradition is that it's not just about duties, and it's certainly not about this calculating idea that we have these abstract principles to follow. It's much more contextual-based, and also it's there's this element of it's the importance of. So, the basic idea of Confucianism is a very diverse tradition, but the basic idea is that the good life lies in humane and harmonious social relations, starting with the family and extending outwards. And, and so we have duties to our family members, right? Most famously, this value of *xiao*, you know, reverence and care for elderly parents and ancestors. Um, but the source of duty and obligation, but they're also a source of joy. I mean, the Confucians say, really, if you, we care so much about joy and happiness. And that's why one of the dialogues there is between the Confucians and the Mohists, right? The Mohists, they, they didn't, they disliked the Confucians because they thought the Confucians wasted a lot of scarce resources on these what they considered to be frivolous activities like music and music and rituals. And they said, "No, we should spend most of the government funding, the priority should be on, um, what we call today, poverty alleviation, providing for the basic material goods of the people, and all the rest is wasting money." They had these great debates in, in, you know, over 2,200 years ago, and they're still highly resonant today. I mean, so I set these dialogues. Um, I have the ancestors of each tradition representing their traditions, but but they have empirical knowledge of what happened since then. So, um, I'm, I'm glad we have an ancestor of Mencius here because we see that, I mean, it's also in the case of the Confucian tradition, they're called the ancestors are called Kong, right? And they have, they have a great family tree. And the ancestors of the, of Confucius, called Kong, still today, are very proud of their tradition and defend it. And I was hired at Shandong University to promote Confucian tradition by a Party Secretary who was called Kong and very proud of his tradition. And he, you know, and they have a clear. So, it's not crazy to put their ancestors in dialogue with each other. Very proud of their traditions while having, while while making sure that they're still, um, alive in terms of knowledge of the contemporary world. So, okay, so the Confucian tradition: humane and harmonious social relations, but they also say that the best life, which is only applies to a minority of people, if you have time and energy and talent, it involves serving the public as a public official, right? So, that's why there's so much competition, goes way back more than 2,000 years ago, between talented people to become public officials, right? And different ways of institutionalizing that, most famously through the examination system in Imperial China for about 1,300 years. And still today, in Shandong province, where the Confucian tradition is strongest, you have, you know, my, my students at Shandong University, the, the ones who, you know, were most like high-achieving in terms of grades and and so on, would really want to be public officials. And that was a strong influence of the Confucian tradition. But the further away you go from Shandong, arguably further south, you know, the less of that there is, right? I mean, in, in Hong Kong, you know, we, the Basic Law, right, says that we're we're proud of our capitalist way of life. By the way, it's the only mini-constitution or constitution of the world where there's this word of capitalism in a positive way. Anyway, so most of my students at Hong Kong U, they're the high-performing ones. They're not so interested in becoming public officials because it's not part of the Confucian tradition. So, the Daoist view is, is as you suggest, it's a kind of a little bit of an antidote to Confucianism because they say, you know, the, the good life doesn't really lie so much in social relations. In fact, the source of of pain sometimes, and especially going into politics, it's so dangerous, you know, you, you should really try to shy away from politics as much as possible. Um, and that we, we get the good life by pursuing these, uh, by being artists or or or or hermits or poets, you know. So, I have this dialogue between the descendant of of Confucius called Kong and the and the Daoist. It's set on on here in Hong Kong on an outlying island, and the descendant of Zhuangzi, he's a poet, right? Which kind of fits more into this this kind of Daoist way of life. We can call it carefree, um, not so committed to social responsibility. And, and it appeals to people also, um, sometimes to teenagers, or sometimes people who are very old who are no longer caring about that much about social responsibility. That's the Daoist. The Legalist view, as you say, it's, it's, it's similar to the Machiavellian, uh, outlook, but it's much more hardcore realism. I mean, Machiavelli looks like a little softy compared to like Shang Yang. I mean, who was arguably a huge influence on the first, on the Qin, which successfully unified China. And they were saying, look, we live in chaotic times, constant warfare. The only way of success is to have is to pursue a strong state and a strong military. And the way to do that is by having a military meritocracy where we reward soldiers strictly according to an objective performance. And for them, it meant number of decapitated heads of enemy soldiers, you know. So, if I kill three and you kill two, I would be promoted, you know. And you have to measure clearly if it's re, is it a soldier, civilian? I mean, it's quite detailed. And this is, and they say Shang Yang, "We have to be more cruel than our adversaries." That's the only way to succeed. And so, there's a debate on just war between Mencius, a descendant of Mencius, who's much more, you know, if you read the Book of Mencius, it opens with him criticizing a ruler of his day, you know, for being, uh, for carrying out unjust warfare. So, he has a very detailed idea about how we should be moral in warfare. And his opponent, of course, is Shang Yang, who, who thinks that this is not going to lead to military success. So, in the book, I imagine, you know, well, what if Taiwan really does declare formal independence, and the, and they have support from the US? There would be very strong pressure, uh, to carry out a military effort. I hope it doesn't come. Of course, we all favor peace. But if it happens, then you would have this debate between these Confucian-inspired and and Legalist-inspired forces. The Mohists are are interesting because, as you say, they're utilitarians in the sense that they, they're committed to impartial care, or impartial love, but they have, let's say, I don't want to be, I want to try to be balanced and to all schools and not favor one in particular, but they have a little bit of a, let's say, a vulgar view of what counts as a good life. And it's really about, you know, having your material needs satisfied, food, clothing, you know, safety. And the state has an obligation to provide that, as opposed to, as mentioned, for them, it's like wasting money on things like music and culture and so on. And that's still a very much a lively debate. So, I set that one in a rural part of Shandong province where I imagine a deliberative poll, where you have farmers, people selected at random, most of which would be farmers, and think about, well, how should we spend the community's money? Should it be on direct material welfare for the poor, or should we have a cultural center? And that's still a very much a lively debate. I mean, even here in Hong Kong, when I taught this in class, my students love this topic because, you know, the Hong Kong government spends a lot of money on like the symphony orchestra, right? I mean, a lot. And it's, it's the major funder. I love it. I go often. But I mean, there's still a huge gap between rich and poor in Hong Kong. So many poor people. Is that really a good use of money? I mean, the Mohists would say no. Confucians have a different argument. Well, actually, music and culture is important for the good life and important for generating a sense of community and care among people. Anyway, sorry for the long-winded response.

Those four philosophers and political philosophers are really, really interesting to hear because even the last one about the Mohists. So, the Mohists in the book is in the third chapter, and specifically the question of whether or not the state should subsidize culture, especially if their basic material needs are not met, as Professor Bell was saying. And this, I find a very interesting topic because right now, we just a few months ago, we had the new 15th Five-Year Plan, and that had dedicated four chapters to culture and tourism. So, you kind of see this play where culture is now not only seen as for pleasure but also as an economic driver, which is quite a way to synthesize these ideas. Are there other instances where you see the synthesis in modern China and modern governance? And I was going to ask particularly, I was listening to your podcast with China Books Review with Alec Ash, and he brought up that when the current Chinese order, he thinks is more related to socialism and Marxism than to Confucianism, which is from over 2,000 years ago. But we all, we know that the CCP prides itself on "socialism with Chinese characteristics." What are such Chinese characteristics that you see with the roots of ancient Chinese political philosophy, and what does that look like? Can you paint the color for us?

Uh, yeah. Well, thank you. So, the first chapter, as you know, it's a debate between a Confucian and a Daoist on family law. And the question here is whether the state should promote values like filial piety, *xiao*, and as it turns out, I mean, it's the states with a Confucian heritage in East Asia, all do it to a certain extent. Like, even here in Hong Kong, right? If you live in public housing, you get a subsidy if you live with your elderly parents. I mean, I'm from Canada, that would be very weird in Canada, right? Or or the US, right? Because the value of filial piety is not is not emphasized as much. Um, or when it comes to, uh, divorce, you know, what should be the law? Should should there be a right to instant divorce, or or should there be a period of mediation, or should divorce be disallowed completely? I mean, these are issues that are very lively. And the socialist tradition has like almost nothing to say on those issues, right? But the Confucian tradition has a lot. And you always have these Daoist critics who don't like these Confucians interfering too much with our everyday lives. So, I try to bring out that debate, uh, in in the first chapter. Second chapter is about how to reduce corruption. Again, timeless issues. All these thinkers were arguing about. Think what makes them great thinkers, that they're arguing about issues that are timeless, right? And the issue of how to reduce corruption was a huge topic in the Warring States period, and it's of course, it's still a huge topic now. If you want to understand it, Marx has almost nothing to say about this, or the socialist tradition. You have to look at these debates between the Legalists and the Confucians to make sense of it. And, and they, and they argued, and these debates were shaped by these Warring States thinkers. Um, so you have a debate between, you know, who systematized the Legalist tradition. And of course, for him, his view is that, look, you can't appeal to people's morality. People are born bad, and they more or less stay bad unless they're happen to be very lucky and born in, you know, there's a society with like infinite material resources, but that's not going to happen. So, the only way to have social order is to have these very strict, uh, punishments and, and basically making people fearful of of doing bad stuff. So, if you want to deal with corruption, which was a huge issue in his day and still is a huge issue now, you need these harsh measures, uh, and, and no exceptions, no mercy. Whereas the Confucians say, and this was a debate throughout Chinese history, and still the debate now. I don't know many people in, in, you know, in Beijing, but I know some of them, and some of the top leaders, when you ask them, they bring up these these debates between Legalists and Confucians as a way of making sense. Confucians would say, look, Legalism can work in the short term if you want to provide social order. But look at what happened to the first emperor of China. He lasted 15 years because eventually people rebel against excessive cruelty when there's an opening to do so. The only way to have long-term success is by changing people's hearts and minds, by making people have a sense of shame when they're corrupt, and, and for that, you need moral education and persuasion and, and good moral examples and, and, and so on. These debates, if you want to deal with corruption long-term, the Confucians have a lot to offer. Um, whereas frankly, you know, the socialist or the liberal tradition has almost nothing. I mean, we really have to turn to these traditions to make sense of these debates today in China, as well.

As an American citizen, I believe I do speak for the country to hope that our current Trump administration can take a page from a lot of the conversation around corruption. With that in mind, though, it does seem that Chinese philosophy and philosophers do percolate into modern day. I was very curious how WeChat's father, Zhang Xiaolong, and also Meituan CEO Wang Xing, they both cite philosophy and ancient philosophy in a lot of their founding texts and their books and how they, um, operate their companies. For example, Meituan's Wang Xing is known to be quite the Legalist, or rather, he supports a particular scholar from the Tang Dynasty that is a big Legalist. And you point out how the state, the social with socialist ideas, have to bring in ancient Chinese philosophy and political philosophy to govern. And only a few weeks ago, as we are grappling with the state of AI, um, and also how to coexist with AI, Beijing made a fascinating ruling stating that AI cannot replace human labor if the decision is purely cost-driven. And we're not seeing this so far in other countries. Um, what else do you think could be other kinds of philosophy you can see in AI alignment or technology alignment, um, in the state of today?

Well, that's that's a great question. Um, and so the thing about the ancient Chinese, um, ideas and values and things that they're still invoked by intellectuals, right? It's not just, and they're still so much part of everyday language in China, right? Like, every intellectual knows, you know, this saying from the Analects of Confucius, or *Bao*, you know, that we should value, let's call it, usually transliterated as harmony, but it's more like diversity and harmony rather than sameness or conformity. Um, and also, and so these, this is, it's so much part of the background and and everyday conversation in a way that wouldn't be true in Canada. Like, it would be pompous if I invoked like Shakespeare and Plato, you know, in my, in my business enterprise or even in my family kind of dealings, you know, it would just seem a bit odd, but not, not in China. So, including many of the business leaders, and including many of the academics. So, you ask for examples. Um, so there's just one example off the top of my head. I met recently a professor of robotics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. And as you know, in China now, yes, filial piety is so important. People, you know, this value that we should care and for our elderly parents and our ancestors, but it's so difficult to implement now because of the one-child per family policy, you know, often, you know, one your one one child has huge obligations to care for like four parents. Um, it's very, very difficult to implement. So, now there's a lot of of idea of how to have care robots that could help to implement, um, this value of filial piety. So, how would you design robots for that purpose? So, this professor of robotics, he said, well, look, men in in the West, when people design robots for elderly people, the main point is to help them become more autonomous, to lead more autonomous lives. But for us, for me, he said, the main idea is to allow them to have more humane social relations with their loved family members. And, and how do you do that? Um, that's what drives, that's what drives his idea for what kinds of values should inform the algorithm for these kind of care robots. And it's not just to make the elderly more autonomous, but to make them more capable of dealing, uh, and in in an engaged and humane way with their loved family members. So, it's a very different idea. Now, what does that mean practically? Um, look, I, I'm not an expert, but just to give you a simple example, if you design, uh, the care robots to be very, very cute, right? It's easy for an el, for some people, you know, to to like that, project their emotions onto a very cute robot, and, and that might detract from, uh, the love that you would care or that you would spend with your loved family members. So, you might want to design, like, I mean, this, this sounds, you know, it's not meant to be flippant, like a deliberately ugly robot to do the necessary work, but then so that, but then the elderly, uh, person, some of whom might have Alzheimer's or whatever, wouldn't be overly attached to them, and that way that would allow for more attachment with their loved members. So, I mean, you know, these, these values are driving ways of thinking about how to design the AI, uh, helpers, and also, yeah.

The less slightly less cute robot, perhaps, explains why the Unitree R1 doesn't really have a face. I think it's very easy for us to attach to a smiley face and a cute face, um, a lot of these feelings.

Yeah. There's a debate now about ghost robots. So, filial piety is not just care for elderly parents, it's reverence for ancestors, right? And so, now there's some digital recreations of dead ancestors. And Confucians worry about that a lot because the point about mourning rituals is that they're meant to eventually help your very extreme emotions, uh, deal with them, but eventually allow you to, to, you know, to move from that to kind of everyday life. But if you have this constant recreation of a dead ancestor, they would make this the Confucian ritual, uh, very much more difficult to implement. So, this is sort of issue two that Confucians argue about. Another issue, sex robots. And here, I'm not the one who writes about this, it's my wife. There's a famous Confucian scholar in Shanghai. I won't say his name. Um, he's a very good scholar, but he wrote this article that was published in *Xueyuan*, which is a leading Confucian periodical in China, where he argues that the ideal, um, wife from a Confucian perspective is would be a, a sex robot because they're, they could be blindly submissive and obedient. And my wife, who works on Confucian ethics, she was outraged when she read that article, and she wrote a critique from a Confucian, but no, that's not the ideal Confucian relationship between husband and wife. It's, it's much more, uh, it's, it's much richer, and it doesn't involve blind obedience at all. So, I mean, these are the debates within this Confucian ethics, um, group that, that I think are very interesting.

These are all very fascinating. I remember meeting, um, recently, the ByteDance's Head of Philosophy, he, uh, Zhang Xiaoyu, and also Amanda Askell from Anthropic. Both of them cite when you build consciousness and you build robotics that are so adjacent to human life that you have to consider philosophy and ancient philosophy of how to coexist. Which is why I think humanities, like what you talk about in your book, is so relevant today. But at the same time, something like AI and technology is occurring, every month there's a step function in change and innovation. And I feel like I'm also struggling to keep up all the time. But on the flip side, Confucianism talks about ritual and repeated, slow repetition to create the sense of community. But if, if the ritual that we have today, if I just look around a restaurant, um, or perhaps at dinner tables, the ritual seems to be doom scrolling, looking at social media. And the ritual that I know sometimes I do also, doom scrolling in bed. These are these types of technology that seep into our daily life so easily without particular design. How would, how do we adhere to Confucius's idea of ritual when the ground beneath our feet is shifting so quickly with new technological products?

Okay, good. So, Confucius, he defines ritual as a social activity, right? If you're alone scrolling on your phone, that's not a ritual in the, in, in Confucius's sense. And he has a very developed theory that the ultimate point of ritual is to develop a sense of community and care among the participants, and especially to make those who have less power and status feel part of the community. So, still today, I mean, look at when we met, we shook hands, right? I mean, that's a ritual that's not going away. Um, we still have marriage rituals, you know, mourning rituals, graduation rituals for the students. I mean, that's not going away. If anything, it's becoming more and more important. So, I'm not sure that, that said, of course, I agree with you that, you know, with AI, I mean, we can be sure that our way of life will change radically, um, over the next, um, next few years. The question is, you know, how, like from a kind of Confucian viewpoint, how can AI help to carry out rituals, um, that have this effect of promoting a sense of community among participants? And so, Confucius's idea of ritual, it's not, it's not very rigid about the form. The main point is to change our emotions from, he thinks we have a tendency to self-interestedness or even selfishness, but we could change through participating in these rituals that are accompanied by beautiful music, usually, right? In Chinese, we say, so ritual always goes with music because that's engages with emotions and and makes us feel, you know, harmonious. Um, so how can AI help to promote those sorts of rituals? I mean, um, let me ask you that question.

How can AI promote that kind of ritual?

Yeah, the sense of ritual, like if we were to participate in a ritual and we want to have a greater sense of community among us too, or among people here, like how can AI help with that, you know? I mean, that would be the question.

I was looking at my Spotify today and did notice that it was very easy now to, at the press of a button, be the DJ of just my playlist and throw a party. I wonder if that is this sort of modern Gen Z way of creating a new kind of ritual. You come together, you meet, you get out of your phones, you get out of your bed, you get out of your individual doom scroll, and you get together, have a rave. Or I actually threw a tea rave last month in Hong Kong at Soho House with this idea in mind that we need to have more, uh, modes of connection and placemaking that gets us together, especially a very wide and diverse range of people.

Cool. That's exactly actually, you mentioned. So, I, sorry, my son, he's a DJ in Hong Kong, and he works at Soho House as well. Julian Bell. I don't know if you know him, but but but anyway.

I'll have to keep an eye out.

Yeah. So, he, so I, I talk about this stuff with him, and he says, yes, through raves is a way of generating a sense of community among people. But he says, he works as a DJ, and he says AI can help a lot because, um, you have to feel the vibe of the crowd, and that's something that you have to really feel it and adjust in accordance with that, and AI is not good at that so far. I still need this human element.

Next time I go to a rave and stay out late, Mom and Dad, please know that I'm fulfilling my Confucian tradition. On the other hand, the Mohists also champion impartial care as like a very rational, utilitarian approach to statecraft and community building that it's not quite about individual expression, but really this utilitarian state. Um, where do you hear the Mohists and the Mohists' voice percolating most in China today? Is it in the algorithm-driven engineer state, to use, um, Dan Wang's "China is a state of engineers and US state of lawyers" kind of framing, or do you see it more in the involutionary technoutopia of Ho and Shenzhen? And I ask this question, keeping in mind of, we've talked so much of Confucianism and Daoism that kind of looseness and ritual that's individual, now wanting to now talk about the larger state and the statecraft. What does that look like?

Yeah, that, that's a great question. So, the, the, the Mohists were, um, they were populists. I mean, they thought they represented, you know, the common people who are oppressed in different ways. Um, and they were also very practical, as you suggest. There were, you know, today we would call them engineers. There's a great museum, by the way, in in Tongzhou in southern Shandong province, which is which is, um, which portrays Mohists in a very favorable light. Actually, I went with the, uh, with a descendant of of Kong called Kong, and he was very upset because they're always criticizing the Confucians for being elitist and aristocrats and so on. But anyway, so, so they, they represent the artisans, um, and the people who work with their hands, and they, and so to the, to the extent that, um, today they would inspire those who are who are critical of this overly intellectual approach, or this, or in China, maybe there's too much emphasis on high academic achievement, you know, through examinations. I mean, the Mohists, the Mohists would be very critical of that. They would say, "No, no, look, we should have great social respect for people who work with their hands and who do practical things, you know, uh, artisans and engineers." And also, frankly, they, even though they were against war, but they developed tools for defensive warfare. So, they had, they developed tools in, in their own day that were military that would have military applications. Um, so I think that's where I, I would see, um, their, their influence today. But the Mohist tradition, among those four that I, that I cover in this book, are the least, let's say, overly, or the least, let's say, influential. Because a lot of their ideas, their best ideas, frankly, were adopted by other traditions, like this idea of impartiality, that the state should be impartial when it comes to dealing with people. I mean, that was pretty much adopted by both the Confucians and the Legalists. And at that point, maybe there wasn't that much need for the. Another point about the Mohists, they were quite rebellious in their time. I mean, they were like forming these these factions and military groups that were kind of hostile to the state. So, once there's a strong state, once China was unified, it's very hard for those sorts of, uh, organizations to survive.

Among the Mohists. Um, and in your book, you bring that, um, up in that debate about music or not by the state. Do you see, how do you see them, how would they talk about today, you think, where culture now is re-entering the lexicon of how we should plan our economy, as I was mentioning about the 15th Five-Year Plan?

Yeah. Well, they don't deny that music brings joy to people. Um, but they think that, look, we live in a society with scarce resources. We still have a lot of very poor people, and, and that's where the state should focus its resources on on poverty alleviation, not on things like culture and music and, and so on. I mean, if, if the private sector wants this, not what they say, this is what they might say if they were here today, if the private sector wants to fund it, fine, but the state should not waste its science. I'm thinking from their perspective, on their, their money on on culture and music and so on. So, they would be, so even in, as mentioned, wealthy Hong Kong, they would be against this like funding for the symphony orchestra. But they're, but again, they're kind of, how, what's the Confucian reply to that? Well, the Confucians say, look, if you want to deal with poverty, we agree with that. Of course, we agree with that. I mean, the Confucians, you know, very much, even from Confucius himself, the state's first obligation is to provide with basic material resources. Similar for for Mencius. And Mencius says, what? Because if people are struggling for necessities, how can they be moral and care about other people and be empathetic and compassionate? It's very hard, right? So, they say, let's, we deal with material poverty, but it's not just a matter of like direct, you know, giving money to the poor. We have to generate a sense of community among people, so that including the wealthy people would would be willing to, um, to give resources and to be taxed in a way that benefits the poor. And how do we generate a sense of community among people? It's through music and culture. So, so that's, that's their counterargument that even if you care about poverty, you should still care about music and culture because that's essential for generating a sense of community, and a sense of community is essential for especially for motivating the wealthy members of the community to care about the poor.

Um, this is perhaps a nice little pitch that there's coming up a marching band from Ohio University, Michigan, coming up at Asia Society, and having fantastic music. So, Asia Society really leading the forefront on both culture and politics. And I think also another film programming coming up as well. Um, so we are also doing what the Mohists and the Confucians would debate about. Um, with, but at the same time, there's also these ancient debates that take a little bit more of a tougher stance, especially in your chapter 4, where you talk about Han Feizi and Shang Yang, who was a Legalist, with Mencius, a Confucian, about whether or not to use military power. Can you walk us through that, like, and whether or not, as all the China hawks in Washington will probably want to know, because their framing is always in this sort of Marxist-Leninist state protectionism. What do you think they should know better about ancient Chinese political thought?

So, the, thank you. So, the Mencian view on just war has been tremendously influential throughout history. There's even in *Foreign Affairs*, there's a recent article on the Confucian peace in the Ming and Qing, about how these these countries with a Confucian heritage, China and, and, and, and Korea and Japan and Vietnam, they relatively had peaceful relations because they more or less adhered to these Mencian views about, we should only engage in warfare as a last resort. Um, and we should, and, and if we do engage with in material, in warfare, there has to be just cause, to use a modern language, and, and just means. Mencius has a very developed theory about this. It was hugely influential, uh, throughout Chinese history, um, and still now. I mean, China hasn't gone to war since 1979, you know, and, and leaders are very aware of. There's a thing about Chinese tradition is that in the West, you know, whether it's ancient Rome or ancient Greece, there's this sometimes warfare is celebrated as a way of being manly, you know, and, and courage is a huge virtue. You, even the Legalists who say we need to have to force people to go to war, that's the only way to have success, but they recognize that war is hell, you know. When you have to, Shang Yang is very clear, how do you motivate people to go to war? Not by saying, "Wow, you could have great courage and and patriotism," none of that. They're saying, "We have to make them fear something even worse." So, if you don't go to war, we're going to torture you to death, or we'll kill your family members, and that's the way to motivate soldiers. So, in China, you know, there's no tradition, major tradition that that celebrates warfare. I think it's hugely important. And, and so, and still today, as, as mentioned, I mean, the Taiwan case would be, there would only be very strong pressure. You know, China always takes a long-term view, right? 10, 20, 30 years. We're not in a hurry to have, you know, more, you know, more like formal form of unification. Um, but if Taiwan declares formal independence, you know, and if the US somehow supports Taiwan, then it'll be very, very dangerous times. And that's where you will have these Legalist, uh, uh, debates on warfare will come to the fore once again, in a very overt and, I think, kind of dangerous way. I try to capture some of that in that chapter.

For those of us in the audience who don't know, what is the Legalist idea of?

So, so the, so the Legalist idea is that, um, the main task, um, of politics is to strengthen state power, and that means having a strong military and a strong, uh, well, wealth means that the state has wealth, not that you have private wealth. That's the. And the way to do that is by having strict and uniform laws in place that that basically force people's behavior in a way that leads to a stronger state. And that's been a very, and because the first emperor of China was explicitly Legalist and had came to such a disastrous end, um, the Legalist tradition has been, you know, under the surface, but in practice, it's always been there to a certain extent, and it comes to the fore in times of chaos. In the 20th century, it came back full-blown, you know, in, in the when the when China was invaded by Japan, you know, the, the leaders, including Mao, Chairman Mao was, well, who became Chairman Mao was was explicitly drawn on Legalist ideas as a way of of having a strong state military to fight off, uh, the invaders. So, it's in times of chaos when there's very strong pressure to use military means to strengthen the state, that's when the Legalist ideas have had great influence. And they have very detailed ideas for how to strengthen the military. I mentioned already, objective means, number of decapitated heads of enemy soldiers. I mean, today might not take that form exactly, you know, but think about it. I mean, in wars today, they still do, you know, like one party would say, "Wow, we have, we killed this many enemy soldiers," as though that's a good thing, you know, and it's still used as a kind of implicit way of measuring military success. And, and the, and the Legalists have very detailed ideas for how to have a strong military. Um, and I expect those ideas to come to the fore if there really is, uh, a pressure to go to war, which again, I hope it doesn't come true, but we need to think about what if it does.

Well, we certainly hope it does not. It does seem that the counting of the heads now seems to be about nuclear warheads. I did read recently that now China has like over a hundred nuclear warheads. Um, but we really hope that does not come to that place. And I do come back to things like mutual understanding, more folks cross, like cross-border reading of books like this, in the US or vice versa, to not come to that point. Um, this brings me to my final question for our fireside chat before we open up to the Q&A, which is, you spent yourself quite transculturally, decades between the West and the East, and China, between Montreal, Oxford, Beijing, Hong Kong. The West, perhaps through misunderstanding sometimes, calls you critics, calls you an apologist. But in the meantime, you, in your book, as the Dean of Shandong, talk about the rigid constraints of institutional life in mainland. And to do that, to be the public figure.

In academia requires a certain kind of performance that you still have to uphold. After you write a book like this, can I ask you which philosopher do you personally draw towards is and when you want to escape the joyless lunch you talk about in Dean of Shandong? Um, are you more like a dowist where you try to, you know, step away and be a hermit in the in the in the lunchroom or you're confusion trying to fix the room and create communities and how are you personally approaching your daily life with these philosophers in your toolkit?

Um, so, so I mean in this book I try to be balanced as you know I don't I don't overtly take sides. Um, but my I guess I'm if you were to say, you know, on on your like on your deathbed, what would be the one book you would take with you? I think it would be the Confucian um book. And there's a great book that just came out called The Dialogues of Confucious. It's called Kongu in Chinese, also published by Princeton. And that provides a even longer introduction to the thoughts of Confucious than the anal of Confucious. It's it's a great book and and and I derive lots of joy from reading that book. Um and again the Confucians yes it's about duty but it's all also about joy you know and and music and and and and and frankly even like the more sensual pleasures that's part of this kind of confusion ethos and the legalists and the and the moist are really deaf to that aspect of life. Of course, the Dowists are not. But on the other hand, there's a very strong streak of pessimism in Dwangza, you know, if you read it. I mean, it's brilliant stuff. I mean, he's absolute genius. Um, but it's kind of pessimistic about the he's saying, you know, anything that experience joy now or happiness is bound to go wrong, you know, and um it's a it's I I've I don't find it as inspiring as as as others, frankly. Um but again I try to portray it in a way that is as generous as possible.

That said, it's also a matter of one's lifespan. like if you're a a teenager, you know, in a more rebellious phase, you know, in including myself, I would have found I probably I would have been more more drawn to like the Dowist aspect. Um or um in middle age when you're very when one is more ambitious and especially politically ambitious then of course the confusion aspect is much stronger. Now I'm I guess I'm less, you know, directly interested in having a political uh u you know, impact. So So maybe I'm I'm as you say um moving slowly to my kind of dowist mountain.

Well, speaking of the Dowists and also a little bit of our Silicon Valley interest in longevity, I have a very fun diagram for you, which is this. This is um for our students in the audience and anyone deep on Instagram or Tik Tok. This is a a very popular social media account called the Eastern Philosophy. She really came to rise in the 2020 and has been I think part of this whole China Maxing interest overseas. her main audience is in the US even though she translates old ancient Chinese um philosophy and ideas traditional Chinese medicine to um to the west.

I I think it's a lovely diagram but I would the getting drunk is not only a kind of or you know dow I think the confucions also think alcohol is part of the good life. Yeah. I wonder among this where do you identify on our level archetypes?

I think if we combine confucious and the would be a beautiful combination.

So getting drunk and being very moral. Sounds like a great combination.

So thank you for having this fireside chat with us. Um I'm certainly very hopeful that ancient ideas like this, as you can see there's kind of 8,000 likes in this post. very very um popular and we see one of them is like where is my homie so certainly not irrelevant as we can see from 2,200 years of history still very relevant today so thank you for this fantastic book and I want to now open the floor to any questions that our audience may have.

Thank you so much for the great conversation the gentleman in.

Oh, hi uh Dr. Bell. Thank you so much for insightful speech. Um I graduated from Rice University in Houston, Texas and uh in 2025 and after that I moved to the state of Israel. So I live uh so I experienced the two wars uh in 2025 and 2026. So my question is, do you think Israel's foreign policy resembles legalist uh state craft or political theory or political philosophy? Because to me it sounds very similar like Israel's hard uh hardcore security postures emphasizes deterrence, preeemption, coercive pressure, uh freedom of military action and survival in a hostile strategic environment. And my second question is um my wife is Taiwanese and what do you think is the best approach um you know like like the the future relationship between China and Taiwan? So uh what do you think is the best scenario? Thank you.

Um wow thank you great question. So um I guess you the the uh it's a leading question about Israel. always see it seems to be much closer to this kind of legalist way of doing things. But I really to understand it, you also to make you make sense of it using the the Jew Jewish tradition um on on warfare, including just war. Um and and a lot of thinkers in Israel are are drawing on that tradition rather than legalism to make sense of what they're doing. And also so are the critics like Michael Walzer. He's a very much a critic of the, you know, right-wing kind of militarists in Israel and and he would draw on the Jewish tradition of just war to criticize them. So, I mean, these ideas are universal, but somehow if their traditions have shaped their society in very important ways, they're more likely to draw on their own traditions. But if if we did have to draw on one of the traditions, obviously the legalist aspect would to me would make more sense of Israel's current uh behavior. um about China, mainland China and Taiwan. I mean obviously I'm pro- engagement and and I think if there's much more interaction between the people including you know allowing of more tourism and academic exchanges and and people exchanges I think that would eventually generate a sense of trust and understanding that allows for a more healthy relationship in the future.

Thank you so much. the lady in the back.

Hi. Um, my name is Marie. Um, when it comes to foreign policy and international relations, um, how does Sanchu's the art of war influence tech, um, contemporary Chinese strategic thinking in cyber warfare and economic diplomacy?

Yeah. Well, that that's a great thank you. It's a great question, but I didn't actually deal with that. So in the la in this book the last chapter has is a kind of self-critique you know why I didn't cover certain uh strands of thought um and one of them is also um swind as the art of war so it's not a theme in this book that said when I was at Schwarzman College in in Chinua um we did um professor Wong Haye and I teach a course on on Chinese political culture and we and we looked at swins as the art of war and it had actually great influence on Mao and in thinking about how to uh fight the war against the Japanese invaders and and we we used it for that purpose. Um I haven't written on that topic and I don't have much more uh to say at at this moment but it's it's a great question. Yeah.

Um the gentleman in glasses and the student and then also the person next to you after. Uh hello, I'm Ethan and I would like to ask how ancient Chinese philosophers would uh respond to uh Clausvit's comment that war is the continuation of policy by other means or Frederick the Great's uh promotion of wars of interest where a country is justified in attacking another preemptively for the purposes of military advantage.

Um okay so thank you. So um for for the legalist obviously war is a continuation of politics. I mean there you know the whole there's no the whole point of the state is to have a militarily powerful state and then you can pursue total war warfare if that's what's uh important to to win and there's no constraints no moral constraints nothing at all um about whether you would be morally justified in carrying preemptive attack. I mean again if you're a legalist of course whatever works w is is morally justifi is not is justified they don't use the word moral but for menious he has a very interesting theory one is that he allows for wars of self-defense if you are threatened by a larger power and the only way you that you could do the only thing you could do to survive is by attacking the larger power then that might be morally justified but he also puts certain conditions in place most important that the people have to be on your side. If the people are not on your side, remember in the waring states period, it was more fluid boundaries, they would just flee to another another country. Um, and so if the people are on the side of the ruler and it's a smaller state being threatened by a larger state, you could build, he's very explicit, you could build larger moes um and walls and he doesn't say preemptively attack, but that would follow from his logic if you are about to be invaded. He also has a a very uh an idea which is similar to modern ideas of humanitarian intervention. What he calls punitive expedition jung if you are a state and you're living next to another state that is a complete tyranny there you can liberate the people from that state but again only under certain conditions. Uh one is that it is a tyranny and what he means by tyranny is that literally there's massive killing of the people through starvation or just execution. They couldn't do it to promote, you know, democracy or whatever. Very clear idea of tyranny. Two, the people who are being liberated have to welcome you. Three, the liberation has to be longlasting, not just shortlasting. And four, there has to be some sort of international support. It can't just be, you know, I'm a leader of a state and then I decided you have to have some sort of some sort of claim for international support. Under those conditions, then what he calls humanitarian what he calls punitive expeditions would be morally justified. It's very interesting theory.

That's an interesting theory and quite made me think of how the pope recently came out with um a statement about AI with anthropic and specifically asking for a disarmment of AI and technological use. I think to demilitarize AI and not use USChina's AI development as a means for um military conflict. So to put that with the legalist sounds quite interesting on if it's encroaching to that point how that would be. Let's take another few more questions. Um first the student next to the other student.

Thank you Dr. Bell. Um so uh please do correct me if I'm wrong but in your presentation when you went on about social order you talked about how confusion sort of has this idea of moral education but as you mentioned we are not a society of sort of infinite material capacity. So how feasible is like this moral education in at least say Hong Kong society?

Um well, let me first ask you what do you think? I mean, are you because I know there's a some schools here actively promote moral education. Do you experience that and is it successful? And then I can.

Uh I wouldn't say we like directly receive it but I feel like it is a positive thing right because I feel like it is of course uh you mentioned uh but it is sort of important that we all sort of get on a similar page but at the same time I understand like because we don't have infinite material capacity there will be some sort of there will be something say greed or these things that will stem out of us not having infinite materials.

Right? So, I don't think we need to set our, you know, um set our heights too to too we don't have to like have a you know an idea that we're going to magically convert people from self-interestedness to like complete altruism, right? It's a kind of spectrum and if we could move people uh towards more this other regarding morality, then that's a good thing. But the way to do that, I mean, the Confucians are very explicit. It's not just by promoting sameness. They're against sameness, right? They say we should promote harmony, which really means diversity in harmony. Recognize that there's diverse views, some of which conflict. And the question is, how can we make those views coexist? Or sometimes making something even better and more beautiful. Like the examples that are used are like um a soup. If you just add one ingredient like salt, it's it tastes bad. You have to add many ingredients. Or music, one note, it's boring. Add many notes becomes beautiful. And in politics too, they say if there's only one viewpoint, it's a recipe for disaster because nobody will criticize mistaken viewpoints. So the Confucians would say we should allow for different views and debates to flourish in a peaceful and civil way and then let the students make up their own mind, you know, and if you're just directly telling the students what to think, typically it's not very uh uh effective, especially, you know, at higher levels of education like once you get to university. I mean, that's why I I do this in in debate format. Just show the debates and then let the reader or the students make up their own mind. And it's it's interesting. Now, I'm going to say something maybe I shouldn't say, but I have um a re a research assistant who's very smart, very high-tech, and he says, "Well, when you teach this, let's do some polling." And so, there's a system where people can vote on certain things uh by doing this QR code without being named for it. So they could it's kind of secret balloting and who who which side they favor and just I'm I was trying to be balanced and not to promote my own views but in almost every case the students be change from like I either dowist or legalist to the more confusion side so maybe I find it hard to hide my own preferences but at least I should try to provide different perspectives. Thank you very much.

Uh the gentleman in glasses.

Um professor Bell, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us today. Um so recently I've been studying USChina relations and obviously there has been a really critical me meeting with Presidenc and President Trump and ever since that meeting some people online and even President Trump himself has um made a narrative called G2 to resurface in the mainstream media. Um so basically it is about a bipolar order between China and the US but obviously this narrative is inherently western and like involves cold war thinking. So from your point of view um what kind of Chinese classical Chinese philosophies would like obviously chi in China we emphasize harmony. So what kind of philos philosophies from the classical era would um counter or challenge this kind of G2 narrative?

Okay, great. So one thing that I haven't mentioned about the influence of Confucianism today is this goes way back in Confucian philosophy that we should try to select. Okay. So there's this in in the uh lii which is the kind of the book of of rituals or the record of rituals. There's a very famous uh idea about an ideal society which they call and basically people know this saying about which means that we should serve you know the whole world. But after that comes this line which means that we should select leaders with superior ability and virtue. Even in the most ideal society, we have to have leaders who have good ability and virtue. Virtue Shien means you're committed to serving the people and ultimately to the whole world. Now, okay, it's a utopian idea, but that idea has been tremendously influential throughout Chinese history. And there's always a huge gap between the ideal and the practice. But today in the Chinese, you know, political system, that language is used. How do we select public officials? They have to have nong, they have to have ability, and they have to have shien, which means virtue. And virtue means you're committed not just to like a certain group of people like current generations but future generations as well and ideally the world as a whole. So China knows it's a large country and I it knows it has obligations to the whole world. Um, you know I'm from Canada you know there's like you couldn't there's a book China shakes the world. Nobody could write a book like, you know, Canada shakes the world because it's it's, you know, it wouldn't shake. But what China does on issues like climate change or regulation of AI, you know, or or how to deal with pandemics has global implications. And you want leaders who have this global outlook and are less constrained by current economic interests or the current interests of the of the of the current generations. And and I'm you know I I do think that the China there's again there's a huge gap between the deal and the practice but at least the current political system aims to select and promote leaders who have this outlook and and at least it works in some of the cases but maybe I'm too optimistic as usual.

The gentleman in the front in glasses Thanks for your thanks for your uh talk. I hear you mentioned a lot about confusion and Shandong. So I'm from Shandong. I'd like to hear about your uh your you know observation about how Asian this Asian philosophy uh influenced like nowadays everyday uh people's everyday life like what do you know on internet there's a lot of stereotype about Shandong right so they say that influenced too much by confusion so become too conservative and not a good place for young people to you know to work and live and some people also Other people say you know Chandu people are so uh uh still steer to this good values like Shia or something you know what's your because you worked in Chando so what's your yeah impression about this.

So I mean confusion like other ethical systems often gets simplified or sometimes even vulgarized in practice like when you look at you know what people think of confucutionism not just in the west but even in China among you younger generations they think it means like you know blindly obey your parents, you know, blindly obey your husband, you know, or or and or or and but that's clear vulgarization, right? I mean, even on filipy, it's very clear in the confusion classics that if your parent does something morally wrong, you have an obligation to criticize them at at certain point. Um, and sometimes if that doesn't work, you know, then you work on their emotions and you cry and and try to gain their heart. It's very detailed. So the problem is that many of the critiques of Confucism are directed at this actually existing, you know, vulgarized forms of confusionism. How do you deal with that? One way is to just show what reinterpret or sometimes we use the word progressive confusionism would look like. And that's what people do. So Shandong obviously the dark side is this patriarchal aspect, right? Arguably it's the most patriarchal part of China. Sorry if I'm um and at least my my wife perhaps would agree with that. Um, and that needs to be challenged. Obviously, there's a need for a new interpretation of confusion that shows that it's more friendly to modern ideas of gender equality, and lots of scholars are are working on that. But that said, there's also a very joyful and beautiful part of Confucianism as manifested in everyday life in Shandong province including for example when I hosted I was dean and when I hosted banquetss you know for people for visiting scholars there's a very deep sense that you want to really h you know you want to welcome your guests through and and the seating arrangements that banquists would try to ensure that every guest is well taken care of by local hosts and the drinking yes there's drinking But it's moderated and ritualized. You have to like you would never drink alone. It would be the rudest possible thing, right? Like in even in Hong Kong maybe initially do you know you do this um you know pongjo you know but after that you're on your own you drink in Hong in Chandong I mean, you know it would be very very rude to start drinking alone. Very very rude. So it's highly ritualized and controlled but I think the ultimate effect is generate a sense of bonding and joy among the participants in those rituals. So, I do want to and I really love that part. Yeah. Thank you.

We'll take a few final questions.

The gentleman in the front.

Uh, thanks for everything that you've shared tonight. I think my question actually relates a little bit to uh elong. I was really interested in what you said about ritual and how in Confucian tradition it's meant to uh build community and sense of belonging between people from different walks of life and maybe especially to give people a sense of purchase and belonging in society. Wondering if you could expand just a little bit on historically what those rituals would involve that could have that effect or if they're designed what would be the elements of ritual. you talked a bit about music. I just was really interested by that idea and if if you could expand historically what what those rituals would look like.

Well, that's a great question. First of all, I'm not a historian and it would but but let me but just so Shinsza discusses two rituals that were very common in his day and he has he has the most systematic and I think you know interesting uh idea of ritual and one is the village drinking ritual which is hierarchical. So people are in the village and then you the elderly person would start drinking first but eventually everybody participates in the ritual including the youngest person and the one with less social status and they're unified by beautiful music and eventually there's this kind of sense of community or or mutual caring among the villagers and you still have that I think it's translated in modern forms as mentioned this maybe this banquet idea in Shandong where it's still hierarchical you know that the seating arrangement is very hierarchical but everybody participates in the ritual And eventually there's a common sense of bonding. Um another um ritual he gives, it's a very on the face it very odd one. The longest example he gives is is the mourning ritual. If a loved one dies, how do you deal with the with the dead body? And it's very very elaborate. You know how how you the whole process of caring for the dead body lasts months and months. But it depends too how badly the body smells. And it sounds so so strange, but then you realize the point ultimately it's it's a power relation, right? If I'm alive and I'm caring for a dead body, it's it's not I I have to be purely altruistic. I can't expect any reciprocity from the dead. And the point is that through this altruism, eventually I could extend that that other regard outlook to the world of the living. It's a very beautiful idea. I'm not sure if you have that much anymore today, but um you know that might be one idea.

Yeah, those are two really interesting examples because we've actually just come back from Fujen. We were on a school trip actually and and sort of two things was one the welcoming with the tea ceremony. So I sat down with some people at the hotel and they're very sort of welcoming with a certain ritual way of doing the tea and how they treat guests. There was also a funeral where the whole village had become involved and so those two examples are really interesting because it was feel like you sort of see it a little bit. Um, anyway that's my question. So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um the gentleman in the middle and then finally the woman next to him.

Thank you for your talk. Uh Professor Bell. Uh you mentioned uh in your in your talk that during uh times of uh of crisis the uh Chinese uh officials party leadership seems to revert to legalism. Um there are numer numerous examples I one that comes to mind is you know the the kind of the the um you know that the crisis between uh hardliners and reformists Lee Pong there other examples of course of course. Is there room for Confucianism to play a role in China today during uh times of crisis and what would that look like?

Well, I guess that's that's that's a great question. So, I mean, I think we're always certain extent in crisis, right? I mean, it's a question of of how how bad it is. I mean, if it's a question of like really survival, you know, existential crisis, this is commonly used terminology today, then I I'm I'm not sure if confusion has a lot to offer. But in regular times like now, um, where there's, of course, this social crisis here, and it's far from harmonious in many ways, but is there a way of of promoting a greater sense of harmony that recognizes difference and conflict and deal with it in a more peaceful way and allows for something more beautiful to emerge from that? Um, I I think it's it's possible. Um, but if it's a time of, you know, where where the state feels that it's either, you know, I I'm dead or or you're dead, then I I'm not sure if I mean, I hope I'm wrong that if confusm has a lot to offer.

The woman in the back, middle, middle back.

Thank you so much, professor. Really enjoyed the talk. Um it's very interesting you mentioned the very famous phrase um harong and it's a very central ideology in China's foreign policy but then like you said it could be interpreted in different ways. It could be um unity or harmony or it could be differences or diversity. So how do you kind of like navigate these linguistic or semantic differences when you're interpreting Chinese um um political thought? And also do you think that not being able to read the original text in Chinese political um theories, political thought would lead to misunderstanding or like um inaccurate interpretation in the west? Do you think it's very important to um be able to read the original text in the Chinese language?

Yeah. So I think for scholars it's important um but if you're if the question of promoting it to the rest of the world then like like this book's trying to do then then the translation is important and it's so important to get the translations right because that that's like the lowest hanging fruit right because is often translated in English as harmony and it's and especially when it comes to in the when you think of in politics harmony is not central in the west it tends to think of conformity and uniformity so it's so essential to translate in a way that doesn't have those connotations like maybe diversity and harmony. Um, so I I think if if the aim you know if the aim is to engage in cross-cultural u enga discourse then we can expect everybody to read the original but at least we should strive to get the translations right so that they're not misleading. Yeah. And that that's part of what I tried to do in this book. Yeah. diversity and harmony to end on this note was actually the key um theme at that the Chinese pavilion at the Venice Bianali presented um in 2024 and as a way to talk about the history and the long ancient history of Chinese arts, Chinese politics and it seems pretty much to tie back in with what your modes versus Confucious confusionism debate is that state and culture and all that it's really hard to remove ourselves from ancient thought in this contemporary world. So, thank you, Professor Bell, for this wonderful conversation and answering pressing questions we have about USChina relations through a different mode of um ideas and thank you Pr uh President Alice Mong for having and hosting us for this fantastic conversation. If anyone has is not very peaked by this book, you can in fact buy it and there's a discount code through print and press that should be 30% off and it's right here. You can either buy the Chinese version or the English version. Chinese version is Chinese publication but still in English.

Thank you. Thank you both for for a great program. And uh thank you Carolyn. Thank you Professor Bell. Uh yes, I think uh the book is available. I know we might have sold out, but please uh the QR code and I want to thank uh both of you for for tonight's discussion. Um but before I I let you go, but um I want to go back to the mxious uh uh my my ancestor. Is it true and because this year we're celebrating or commemorating 250th anniversary of the founding of of the United States. Is it true that um through political philosophy you know Manxious had some influence some of the stuff that he wrote also kind of uh Thomas Jefferson had been uh you know admire of Manxious philosophy can you confirm or confirm that.

Yeah, so there's this scholar um called Martin Powers originally he was at University of Michigan and and now he's at Beda Piking University and he's writing on that in very fascinating ways the influence of of Chinese thinkers on the American American founding fathers. And strangely enough, I mean, we can criticize Donald Trump, but when he came to to Beijing this time, he actually mentioned some of that and the influence on Benjamin Franklin. And yeah.

So that could be a future program. We've been thinking about uh Dorothy and I have been talking about that 250th anniversary and we want to commemorate something. So maybe this is our next project, next uh program. But thank you both and thank you all for being here. I want to thank the program team. I know they work really hard, especially Dorothy. We do have uh we're working on a June 18th uh gala dinner honoring Sir Gordon Woo. So those of you who are interested, please check out our website. But thank you all for being here and have a wonderful evening and thank you both. Thank you. Thank you.