Tea Party 道理

Brief contextualization of conversation with cabbie (sept 3) about 利 (benefit) and good governance.

One of the classical references to why going after benefit is not good governance comes from Mencius:

孟子见梁惠王。王曰,叟不远千里而来,亦将有以利吴国乎。孟子对曰,王何必曰利,亦有仁义而已矣。王曰何以利吴国。大夫曰何以利吾家。士庶人曰何以利吾身。上下交征利而国危矣。万乘之国,弑欺君者,必千乘之家。千乘之国,弑欺君者,必百乗之家。万取千焉,千取百焉,不为不多矣。苟为后义而先利,不夺不厌。未有仁而遗其亲着也。未有义而后其君者也。王亦曰仁义而已矣。何必曰利。

Rough translation with my glosses (so yes, if you have questions, check out another translation):

Mencius met with King Hui of Wei. The King said, “I don’t think 1,000 miles is too far to go if it benefits my kingdom.”

Mencius replied, “Why does your Majesty mention 利 (li – benefit) when all that is needed is benevolence and righteousness? When the King speaks of what benefits the kingdom, then officials speak of what benefits their clans, and nobility and commoners speak of their personal gain. When superiors and inferiors are struggling to obtain 利 then the kingdom is endangered. It is the clan of 1,000 chariots that kills the king of a 10,000 chariot kingdom [because the king took too much and gave nothing back]. It is the clan of 100 chariots that kills the king of a 1,000 chariot kingdom [because the king took too much and gave nothing back]. Taking 1,000 from 10,000 or 100 from 1,000, neither can be considered negligible [when the king gives nothing back]. Thus, when gain comes before righteousness, then none are satisfied until they’ve wrested the gain for themselves. Only when benevolence is established are there [proper] families. Only when righteousness is established is there a [proper] king. Why speak of 利? [Why make benefit the reason for your government when it should be benevolence and righteousness?]

In other words, we (in both the US and China) find ourselves in a state of tea party hegemony. It’s not the poor who rebel – taxi drivers and farmers who are satisfied with enough to eat, but rather the upper middle class who thinks the government is taking too much in taxes and not giving enough in return. The fact that Sarah Palin and her ilk have missed the point of the Boston Tea Party (equitable representation in government in order to fairly allocate common goods) does not mean they haven’t touched a populist nerve: the people do feel overtaxed relative to the good (benevolence and righteousness) that the government administers.

All this to say, Shenzhen cabbies have a remarkably clear eye for what’s wrong with the US because they see what’s also wrong with China.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s