The Democracy of the Dead: Dewey, Confucius, and the Hope for Democracy in China (review)

Toward the end of their new book, David Hall and Roger Ames conclude that "In many ways our entire essay may be understood as an attempt to encourage both Chinese and Westerners to include one another in the term 'we'" (p. 239). This is indeed what they have done—and they have done it well.

Hall and Ames are up front about their belief that significant differences exist between Chinese and Western cultures: "Some believe that failing to regard the commonality [between China and the West] as most important is to deny the Chinese their humanity; others believe that to assert such an essential commonality is to deny the Chinese their cultural uniqueness. . . . We intend to . . . argue that these differences . . . are both real and fundamental" (p. 6). How can two cultures with such fundamental differences be united as one? Their answer is that the two cultures can understand their differences through an appreciation of what they have in common. The fundamental difference for Hall and Ames is that, unlike the majority view in the American culture of today, the Confucian tradition does not view human rights as inalienable. However, this Confucian perception is not completely foreign to American culture: American philosopher John Dewey holds the same view.

Hall and Ames contend that from the perspective of Confucius as well as of Dewey, human rights are not inalienable, and the victory of Western rights-based democracy is only a historical accident. In other words, neither should be viewed as inevitable for all of the world's cultures. Therefore, Hall and Ames urge "Western promoters of China's democratization" (p. 18) to understand a different view of human rights, a view that has had a long tradition in China and that was also held by Dewey. According to this view, human identity evolves and realizes itself through time; this means that human rights are not predetermined and therefore not a given simply because of the physical existence of humanity. Hall and Ames call this emphasis on change over stasis "the narrative character of the Chinese culture" (p. 30). Also, in this first section of the book, they challenge the myth of Han unity, pointing out actual diversities of ideology, class, and ethnicity among the Han people. Both the myth of Han unity and the myth of modern democracy need to be challenged, the authors maintain, in order for China and the West to understand each other better.

Part 2 explains why the concept of modernity—"the alliance of [liberal] democracy with capitalism and technology" (p. 146)—is historical and accidental, a Western invention that is far from being absolute and universal. Given the real and fundamental differences among the world's cultures, both Easternization and Westernization are necessary for mutual understanding to be possible. Since Westernization has been more prevalent than its counterpart, Hall and Ames devote part 3 to demonstrating how the West might actually learn something meaningful from the East. It is for this purpose that Hall and Ames find invaluable the observations of John Dewey, an American philosopher who is more familiar to American readers. According to Dewey, it is a "fiction" that an individual has rights that exist prior to the association of that individual with his or her community (p. 225). This, Hall and Ames argue, is a view with which Confucius could not agree more.

Part 4 shows the result of Hall and Ames' years of collaboration, and their points are thought provoking. "Rights are granted by society" (p. 231); they are not innate or inalienable, but "earned through participation in and contribution to a specific cultural world" (p. 233). "Many forms of censorship are widely accepted by the members of a Confucian society" (p. 234), state Hall and Ames, because "the right of free speech has not existed in China" (p. 233). For, they explain, just as...