The Origin and Persistence of Confucian Deliberation in China

Baogang He- Head of Public Policy and Global Affairs Program at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

This is Lecture 1 of the Wesson Lectures. Professor He's title for the series is "An Empirical Theory of Authoritarian Deliberation." The very thought of deliberative politics in contemporary China may seem surprising. Indeed, there are questions over its veracity. Analyses of scholarship on deliberative democracy in China to date might be said to fall into two camps: one sees the emergence of deliberative democracy in China as a real prospect for democracy; the other dismisses it outright. This lecture offers an alternative evaluation to these two camps. It first makes a conceptual distinction between democracy and deliberation. Although deliberation is usually associated with democracy, they are distinct phenomena. Democracy involves the inclusion of individuals in matters that affect them through distributions of empowerments such as votes and rights. Deliberation is a mode of communication involving persuasion-based influence. It then proposes a theoretical reconstruction of deliberative culture which accounts for a proliferation of contemporary deliberative practices in China and the CCP’s sponsorship of deliberative experiments and institutions. The theoretical reconstruction of contemporary deliberative practices bears traces of the Confucian moral code of deliberation and the institutionalization of deliberation throughout the history of the Chinese imperial states. The upshot in taking this theoretical approach is that we can confirm that the practice of deliberation in contemporary China is well and truly alive, but it does not readily map with Western theoretical models of deliberative democracy. This lecture sets up a contrast between an authoritarian deliberation—the use of actual deliberative practices by the authoritarian state to improve governance and enhance its authority— and the "western" idealized version of democratic deliberation. It considers the limitations of the Chinese model of authoritarian deliberation and explains why and how it may constitute, at least partially, a defensible normative account of the contributions of deliberation to political legitimacy, and in doing so hopes to illustrate some important historical lessons for Western deliberative democracy.

Monday, November 04, 2013 | 5:30 pm — 7:00 pm
Henry and Monique Brandon Family Community Room, Black Community Services Center

Center for Ethics in Society