Recently, I read a philosophy textbook called “A Brief History of Chinese Philosophy,” and I felt it was written very well. It basically covers the history of Chinese civilization from ancient times to the present, from slave society to the end of feudalism, highlighting some of the most famous philosophical schools in China and their progressive and reactionary aspects. I have to say, from a progressive perspective, it is truly very progressive. Our ancestors proposed many advanced ideas and developed many wise philosophical schools. Of course, there was also a group of old fools who spent their days promoting some laughably reactionary philosophical views, defending and whitewashing extremely corrupt and backward reactionaries. Moreover, it was only after reading this book that I realized that some of the famous historical figures we knew before actually had a completely different true face from what we imagined. I highly recommend this book; anyone interested in philosophy must read it!
This book has a very impressive point, which is that it analyzes almost all philosophical schools in the development of Chinese civilization from the period of Chinese slavery until the end of the feudal system, clarifying the struggle between the two main ideological lines of materialism and idealism. What particularly impresses people is his analysis and distinction of the Hundred Schools of Thought during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, summarizing the further schools and reactionary schools within them. This part is truly written with great finesse.
Gongshi (slave-owning class), private family (landlord class) opposition: “Gong” actually inherits various powers from clan slave owners, while private “owners” develop into the landlord class through private means. The former is reactionary, the latter is progressive; the latter seeks to seize power, the former to defend rights, so class struggle is very intense. Confucianism is a reactionary faction inheriting the so-called Mandate of Heaven (in fact, inheriting the set of rites, governance, and music laws established by Duke Zhou, which is a philosophical school aimed at maintaining the dying slave system).
Confucian school advocates for the maintenance of slavery by promoting benevolence and virtue, openly stating that “benevolence is loving others,” which actually means loving people like oneself (i.e., the slave owners), with a hierarchical order and differentiated love, emphasizing filial piety and brotherly love. “Benevolence” originally belongs to the moral domain, but Confucius linked it to the Mandate of Heaven, claiming it is an a priori gift from God. Confucius portrayed himself as a person endowed with virtue from Heaven. Virtue is innate, derived from the Mandate of Heaven, so Heaven’s virtue is also the Mandate of Heaven; Heaven’s virtue bestowed upon people is called “human virtue,” which is “benevolence.” Therefore, those who possess these ideas are destined to rise. This view is very similar to Mencius’s idea that a king will emerge in five hundred years. Confucius said that with benevolence and virtue, one has the Mandate of Heaven, and with the Mandate of Heaven, one can rule the world, and he considers himself the most virtuous. The so-called “Filial piety is the foremost of the hundred virtues” is a clear reflection of this hierarchical and clan system. Benevolence is the upper class’s charitable love for the lower class—essentially deception and oppression. With both benevolence and virtue, rule can last long; this emphasizes the importance of deception and repression to maintain control. (Rites and filial piety are core, forming the set of ruler-subject and parent-child relationships; filial piety is a form of rites). This was fiercely opposed by the Moists, who held a simple egalitarian view (see later), and also opposed by representatives of the advanced Legalist school. The Legalists advocated “equality before the law,” aiming to abolish the privileges of the slave-owning class, which was a sharp opposition. There is also the Taoist Laozi and Zhuangzi school. To justify their decline, they differ from the rigid faction and admit the fall of the slave-owning class. Thus, there arose the view of accepting fate and being content with the status quo. Because they acknowledge the coming end of the slave-owning system, which cannot survive, dialectical elements appear. However, due to their class nature, their dialectic is incomplete, ultimately leading to metaphysics. (Note: Looking at the world, compared to Western Europe at the time, which was still progressive and reactionary in the struggle of slave owners, China directly entered the stage of Confucian-Legalist struggle, which was a step forward and a result of mass struggle.)
They use subjective idealist apriorism to defend the slave owners. Confucius’s benevolence is based on “filial piety.” Essentially, it is aimed at members of the ruling clan; the so-called “restraining oneself and returning to rites” is about obeying the old rites and order of Western Zhou to restore the slave-owning rule. He believed that “if the rulers uphold rites, the people will dare not disobey,” meaning if rulers follow rites, the people will also obey. “Restrain oneself and return to rites” opposes the aristocratic rule of slave owners and becomes Confucius’s black banner for restoring the slave system politically. In 513 BC, the “casting of the criminal code” by Jin was a result of class struggle. Engraving laws on an iron cauldron confirmed the established laws, which was a blow to the slave system. Confucius opposed “casting the criminal code” and “using land taxes,” aiming to uphold the so-called rites and the dictatorship of the slave-owning class.
In the ideological realm, Confucius was extremely hostile to the laboring people, calling them “little men.” He also used the excuse of organizing ancient texts to concoct a reactionary view of history, and his work “Spring and Autumn Annals” was a counterattack against the laboring people and the emerging landlord class.
The differences among the Confucian, Mohist, and Legalist schools:
Confucianists always stand on the side of clan slave owners, attempting to strengthen the racial slave system and uphold this patriarchal system. For this purpose, they invented many theories to maintain this rule. The most core of these is benevolence, and those who possess benevolence (meaning those who conform to the slave owner’s virtue) are considered to be divinely appointed to rule the world, that is, the slave owners will ultimately rule. They invented terms like the ethics of the Mandate of Heaven, which refers to the divine decree and moral principles, abbreviated as Tianlun. The popular idiom today, “Tianlun’s happiness,” originally meant the pleasure enjoyed by feudal patriarchs from the service of others, a privilege exclusive to the feudal patriarch, not the current common meaning. From this, it is evident that Confucianists are extremely reactionary. Besides, Confucius also promoted the distortion of reality to fit old names, which is another clear proof of his reactionary thinking.
The opposing figure is the pioneer of the Legalist school, Deng Xi. Confucianism teaches the Mandate of Heaven, believing that divine will can control human affairs, which is a theistic idealism viewpoint; Deng Xi denies that Heaven has will, believing that divine matters are unrelated to human affairs, advocating the separation of Heaven and man, which is a simple materialist natural view. He firmly opposed distorting reality to fit old names and instead advocated creating new names to match new realities. From this perspective, he was very progressive. Deng Xi proposed that what is not, is, and what is, is not, meaning that the slave-owning class’s view of right and wrong is reversed—what they consider wrong, he considers right; what they consider right, he denies. The chaos in Zheng state disrupted the slave-owning class’s standards of right and wrong, which was a fierce blow to the ideology of slaveholder rule.
In addition, there was the Mohist school, representing small producers at the time. During the decline of slave society and the formation of feudalism, small producers, having been liberated from exploited and oppressed slaves, were close to production and stood with the working people. Due to their accumulated experience and wisdom from labor, they could develop advanced siege and defense equipment, among other things, which were results of working-class culture and labor. Ideologically, Mozi was strongly opposed to Confucius’s benevolence and explicitly pointed out that his so-called benevolence was internal to the slave-owning class. To counter this, he proposed the ideas of universal love and non-aggression, advocating equal love for all people. At that time, to oppose the extremely reactionary Confucian ideology, such ideas were progressive. However, limited by the constraints of small-scale production, Mozi ultimately could not recognize love beyond class. Tyrants cannot love their ministers, and the people cannot love tyrannical slave owners—that was his limitation. Unlike the most progressive Legalists, Mozi also advocated what is called pacifism, hoping to maintain the lives of working people through peace by stopping wars. However, this was impossible at the time because slavery and feudalism were irreconcilable contradictions, and they would inevitably clash. Only by advocating a war to end all wars, eliminating all slave states through violence and establishing a feudal autocratic state, could this be achieved. Yes, history moves forward, and people’s lives will be liberated from the slavery society.
Additionally, like Deng Xi, Mozi also opposed Confucius’s “Zhengming” (correct naming). From an epistemological perspective, he opposed using “names” to define the developing “reality” and opposed subjective regulation of the objective. He advocated “taking reality as the basis for naming,” that is, giving appropriate names based on the actual development of reality, acknowledging factual changes. In this regard, he was also very progressive.
Characteristics of the development of Confucian thought during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods after Confucius:
Preliminary summary【From the perspective of the entire historical development stage, the development of Confucianism went from objective idealism to subjective idealism (benevolence), then to Zisi’s “sincerity,” and later during the Eastern Han period, it developed into “omens and divination theology.” After the Three Kingdoms’ Legalist route suppressed Confucianism, the Jin Dynasty began to revive Confucianism. Later, it merged with Taoism and Buddhism—what is called the unification of Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism. During the Tang Dynasty, there was also a crackdown on Confucianism, but as history progressed, the reactionary nature of the landlord class gradually became more apparent. Their irreconcilable contradictions with the people became more obvious, so the critique of Confucianism was no longer as profound as before. Moreover, as the ruling class, the landlord class used Confucianism as a tool to suppress the working people. Therefore, although the Tang Dynasty also suppressed Confucianism, it was not thorough; as for the uniqueness of Wu Zetian as a female emperor (not attacking Confucianism and opposing patriarchy and husbandry would be difficult to stabilize her rule), although she suppressed Confucianism more thoroughly, she used Buddhism to suppress Confucianism. In terms of reactionary nature, both are ultimately the same. As time went on, Confucian political routes became more mainstream, and the lives of the common people became more miserable, resulting in peasant uprisings that continuously struck at the feudal system. Under this social development trend, Confucianism also became increasingly reactionary. Later, it developed into Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucianism, which was unprecedentedly reactionary and caused the masses to suffer even more.
After Confucius, during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods, the development of Confucian思想0and its代表人物:
①子思:
The Zhongyong (Doctrine of the Mean) is considered子思’s “great contribution” to the development of Confucianism, as he carried out a comprehensive reactionary development of Confucius’s teachings. He said that without “sincerity” there is no world, which is an extension of孔丘’s “benevolence” (仁), representing a subjective idealist a priori theory. 【From a worldview perspective, he affirms the theory of天才 (talent bestowed by heaven), concluding that the exploited class is omniscient and omnipotent; this worldview’s epistemology is that the world is produced by the human mind; thus, the methodology derived from it is “cultivation” (刘少奇’s enthusiasm). The exploiting class cannot prove their abilities with facts, so they can only delve into the most subjective idealist “cultivation,” no longer needing other methods to justify their actions. Confucianists are essentially ignorant and inactive, thus promoting mysticism. They advocate that through inner cultivation one can “reach sincerity and connect with heaven,” forming their own flawed logic. Just as Confucians say: cultivate oneself, regulate the family, govern the state, and bring peace to the world. Cultivating oneself refers to the three bonds and five constants, regulating the family involves disciplining children and spouses, making them obedient, establishing family hierarchy; governing the state involves hereditary titles to suppress the masses and enjoy wealth and honor, ultimately achieving “peace in the world.”
The Confucian theory of cultivation appears to suggest that being born into a slave-owning family is inherently good, and being born lowly is inherently evil. Their rule is thus justified. Therefore, from the reactionary class’s perspective, their actions (as described above) are considered great achievements. They adhere to and promote the order of the exploiting class without discussing right or wrong, believing it to be correct and moral. This shows that it is only after the reactionary class’s actions that they develop this set of Confucian doctrines to defend themselves. Overall, Confucianism is a summary of this reactionary worldview and methodology.
子思 also promoted idealism, claiming that national prosperity is accompanied by auspicious signs, and decline by evil omens (a classic example). His idea of “sincerity and extending the nature” greatly influenced later generations, but in practice, it served feudal autocracy and fascist dictatorship. He also promoted “慎独” (careful solitude), advocating closing oneself in to reflect, opposing contact with external affairs and social realities, and promoting a priori idealism. To maintain the dying slave system, he also played on孔丘’s doctrine of the Doctrine of the Mean. The so-called 中庸 (Doctrine of the Mean), ostensibly about impartiality, is actually about harmonizing social contradictions and suppressing class struggle. For example,孔丘 advocated “excess is as bad as deficiency.” Preventing good qualitative change is the essence of the Doctrine of the Mean. 【To counter this, one should use the “lifting the roof” methodology mentioned by Lu Xun, which is also what Mao Zedong called “overcorrecting”】孔丘 believed that the Doctrine of the Mean, as a moral, should be the highest! But when slaves revolted or rebelled, they no longer bought into this deceptive ideology. This indicates that the class struggle of the masses will ultimately smash孔家店 (the孔 family shop), and the phrase “the petty man opposes the Doctrine of the Mean” (referring to the working people hating the Doctrine of the Mean) is the best proof.
The Confucian Doctrine of the Mean opposes social change, aiming to maintain slavery forever, and is metaphysical in philosophy. This was also a struggle between two classes and two ideological lines at the time. Later, the landlord and bourgeoisie promoted class reconciliation and the theory of the end of class struggle, which is essentially the “Doctrine of the Mean.” From here, we see the historical roots of reactionary思想 and idealist philosophy. For example, today, the Nazi fabricated and promoted “Fengqiao Experience,” which essentially advocates “solve problems where they occur,” avoiding escalation. It emphasizes resolving contradictions through a focus on群众镇压 (mass suppression), which is actually helping capitalists suppress the masses. The so-called Doctrine of the Mean is fundamentally about leaning towards decayed and reactionary things.
②孟轲:
孟轲 (China’s Plato) has a famous story, the so-called孟母三迁 (Meng’s mother moving three times), which actually tells a reactionary story:孟母’s purpose was to let孟轲 detach from the masses and be exposed to reactionary influences from a young age. Today, society promotes sayings like “You understand as a parent,” or “Daughter-in-law becomes mother-in-law,” which are actually the oppressed accepting Confucianism and becoming vested interests, standing on the oppressor’s side to suppress the oppressed.
孟柯’s worldview is derived from孔丘 and子思’s 天命 (Mandate of Heaven)思想, especially further developing子思’s “存诚尽性” (sincerity and extending the nature). He believed that “诚” (sincerity) comes from the 天道 (Way of Heaven) and is inherent in the human heart, so孟柯 further said: “All things are prepared in me; reflecting inwardly and being sincere, joy is greatest.” That is, if people can reflect inwardly, they can grasp “诚.” “诚” is innate, inherent in human nature, the natural state of human性; on the other hand, it also indicates that “诚” is the essence of all things in the universe. So, if one masters “诚,” then “all things are prepared in me,” meaning the world and everything in it are under my control, manifested through the inner “诚”. From a worldview perspective, this is subjective idealist solipsism: having the self means having everything, including the world. From an epistemological perspective, it is “no external seeking,” because all things are in my mind, so there is no need to seek outside. This is孟柯’s subjective idealist worldview leading to a subjective idealist epistemology. 【In fact, this set of ideas, from ontology to methodology, is a justification philosophy for parasitic exploiting classes, claiming that parasitic aristocrats are inherently omniscient and omnipotent】.孟柯’s epistemology manifests as a priori idealism, characterized by the development of human nature theory. He believed goodness is human nature, innate and natural. He also regarded moral principles like “仁” (benevolence), “义” (righteousness), “礼” (ritual), and “智” (wisdom) not as reflections of external社会存在 (social existence) in the human mind, but as “inherent in me” (actually instilled by Confucian思想). In reality,孟柯’s premise excludes slaves, believing only君子 (gentlemen) are truly human, exposing his true nature (which modern middle-class scholars won’t mention; they portray孟柯 as an abstract “loving others” person).
Starting from an a priori theory of human nature,孟柯 advocates “prophets” and “genius” in epistemology. He also said “talents descend from heaven,” linking “heaven” and “talent,” promoting a唯心主义 (idealism) theory of天才 (genius).孟柯 also claimed “a king will rise in every 500 years, and there will be famous people” (referring to himself as a “philosopher king” of China). Since孟柯 denies learning from external sources, the only way to study is to recover the lost innate “conscience”; by expanding one’s inner心, and developing inherent善, one can achieve “knowing heaven,” i.e., “unity of heaven and man.” From孟柯’s perspective, heaven endows humans with innate human nature, and天命 (Mandate of Heaven) is connected with human心, so all things are in human心, thus “exhausting the heart” can “know性” (know nature), i.e., “know heaven,” which means knowing everything. 【This is similar to Zen Buddhism, which says that the Buddha is in the心, and one can become a Buddha with a single thought】
To implement his idealist epistemology,孟柯 also advocates a method of inward cultivation. He insists that the human心 should not be诱 (诱: tempted) by外物 (external objects), and through introspection, expand the inherent仁 (benevolence),义 (righteousness),礼 (ritual), and智 (wisdom) in the human心, cultivating “浩然之气” (vital气), which can fill the天地 (heaven and earth). In modern terms, this means subjective精神 (spirit) self-expansion, enabling mastery over the world through understanding. This shows that孟柯’s worldview, epistemology, and cultivation methods are all a set of subjective idealism, i.e., thorough唯我论 (solipsism). 【From this, one can see that popular contemporary xianxia (immortal cultivation) novels are actually using Confucianism to promote hierarchical order. Confucianism also likes to promote “social morality,” such as孟轲’s sacrifice for righteousness theory. In essence, it aims to oppose the landlord class, restore slavery, and prevent people from abandoning奴隶制 (slavery) morality due to feudal progress and benefits.】
From the above,孟柯 believes that human nature is善 (good), seemingly equal for everyone, but in reality, it has class性 (class nature); only君子 (gentlemen) have “德” (virtue), while小人 (petty persons) do not possess “善”. This性善 (good nature) theory is essentially deceptive, a rehash of等级制度 (hierarchical system).孟柯 believes that奴隶主贵族 (slave-owning aristocrats) should rule the people, and劳动人民 (working people) should be ruled and supported by奴隶主贵族, with rulers supported by the people (劳心者治人, 劳力者治于人). The oppressive and exploitative relationship of rulers over people,孟柯 calls “天下之通义” (universal righteousness of the world). This openly advocates the奴隶主’s rule and exploitation of slaves and people as natural and justified.孟轲 also advocates复古倒退 (restoration of ancient customs), returning to奴隶制 (slavery) land distribution制度. He proposed the so-called “分田制禄” (land division system and stipends), aiming to restore奴隶制’s land distribution method, which is actually a counterattack against emerging力量 (forces), restoring井田 (well-field system) and正经界 (proper boundary system) to reinstate奴隶社会 (slave society) and世卿世禄 (hereditary noble titles).
孟柯 also advocates “仁政” (benevolent government), which includes排斥功利 (rejecting utilitarianism), promoting “仁义” (benevolence and righteousness).孟柯 opposes商鞅’s “耕战” (farming and warfare) reforms, considering them crimes; he condemns商鞅’s proposal for feudal unification wars as a major crime, advocating death penalty. He viciously insults商鞅 as “民贼” (traitor to the people), slandering法家 (Legalists). “In class society, it is either this class’s utilitarianism or that class’s utilitarianism.” During燕国’s implementation of法家 (Legalist) policies, he incited齐宣王 (King Xuan of Qi) to attack and executed法家 officials, showing he was not against war but against法家 (Legalist) progress in unification wars.孟柯’s “仁政” (benevolent government) is merely opposition to地主阶级 (landlord class) utilitarianism, aiming to uphold奴隶主阶级 (slave-owning class) interests. This is a deception of劳动人民 (working people) and a反动 (reactionary) attempt to restore封建 (feudal) reforms.
孟柯 frequently talks about “仁义” (benevolence and righteousness), selling filial piety as “仁” and fraternal duty as “义”—Confucian doctrines【since China is a slave society,孟柯’s talk of仁义 is actually to restore the rule of clan aristocrats】. From this,孟柯’s political路线 (line) is an attempt to realize孔丘’s (Confucius’s) wish of “克己复礼” (self-restraint and return to礼), restoring奴隶制 (slavery). He claims “benevolent government” and “王道” (the Way of the King) are just deceptive appearances. 【ps:孟柯’s idea that “a king will rise in every 500 years” later influenced the阴阳家 (Yinyang school) of Zou Yan at the end of the Warring States. They distorted the original primitive materialist theory of the “Five Elements” into a cyclical theory based on the五行 (Five Phases), which is a唯心主义 (idealistic) historical循环论 (cyclical theory), tinged with superstitions. Later Confucians and even modern ones, like温铁军, promote this theory.】
Furthermore, his concept of “民贵君轻” (people are precious, monarchs are light) is actually a反动 (reactionary) against法家 (Legalist) policies, opposing progressive policies of法术势 (Legalist tactics), demanding that monarchs serve the大奴隶主贵族 (great slave-owning aristocrats) and restore奴隶制 (slavery), not some nonsense about民主思想 (democratic ideas). His “民” (people) and “君子” (gentlemen) are the same group, within the奴隶主 (slave-owning) ruling class.
Because孟柯 claims to be the orthodox of孔丘’s儒家 (Confucianism), he relentlessly attacks other schools, such as骂杨朱 (criticizing Yang Zhu) as “无君” (no ruler), and墨翟 (Mozi) as “无父” (no father). Yang Zhu’s “为我” (for me) emphasizes valuing oneself and rejecting物 (things), trying to escape reality to preserve oneself.孟柯, defending氏族贵族 (clan aristocrats), believes Yang Zhu only cares about self-preservation and adopts a passive attitude towards维护旧世界 (upholding the old world), thus criticizing him as “无君”. As for墨翟’s “兼爱” (universal love), it is aimed at破儒家 (breaking Confucianism) to maintain氏族贵族 (clan aristocrat) rule by promoting “亲亲” (family love) and “仁” (benevolence); this has some positive aspects. However, it remains a form of阶级调和思想 (class reconciliation ideology), which孟柯 cannot tolerate, and he stubbornly defends the declining氏族贵族 (clan aristocrat) rule, claiming that墨翟’s “兼爱” (universal love) opposes差别 (differentiation) between亲疏 (closeness and distance), thus criticizing him as “无父” (no father).
From孔丘 to子思 and孟柯, their theories defending exploitation are useful to later feudal rulers; especially the天人合一 (unity of heaven and man)神权政治 (divine right politics)思想 (thought), which is more conducive to authoritarian rule. The so-called圣人 (sage) using神道 (divine way) to教化 (educate) is aimed at deceiving the ignorant masses. Therefore, the思想 (thoughts) of子思 and孟柯 have deep toxic influence, and by the Western Han, they were inherited and systematized by董仲舒 (Dong Zhongshu), gradually becoming the theoretical basis for feudal autocratic rule. From then on,孔孟之道 (Confucian and Mencian doctrines) became a spiritual shackles for enslaving the working people. To thoroughly smash these mental shackles, it is necessary to criticize孔孟哲学 (Confucian and Mencian philosophy) and eliminate their toxic influence. 【Note: Although the landlord class, after seizing power, adopted some Confucian sayings and methods, the essence—whether the previous regime was progressive or reactionary, whether it followed Confucian or Legalist路线 (line)—cannot be mechanically judged by whether they fully adopted a certain school’s policies. For example, although汉武帝 (Emperor Wu of Han) established Confucian官职 (official positions) and employed Confucian scholars, fundamentally he was a great landlord class representative following the法家 (Legalist)路线. Later, many progressive法家 (Legalist) emperors adopted policies with some Confucian influence, but their core路线 (line) remained unchanged. Combining Confucianism and Legalism in this way is a严重的历史唯心主义 (serious historical idealism), which distorts and negates the class struggle within the landlord class, and the distinction between progressive and reactionary路线 (lines), thus denying the materialist view of history. This is precisely the revisionist’s favorite argument, and is also the common rhetoric promoted by today’s revisionist China.
Due to personal limitations and other reasons, there are certainly many shortcomings and even errors in my notes and reflections while reading. I welcome everyone to point out issues and discuss together. Confucian思想 (Confucianism) has truly poisoned the Chinese people for too long!