Paul Gewirtz has suggested that contemporary Chinese society lacks a shared framework. A Rortian might describe this by saying that China lacks a “final vocabulary” of “thick terms” with which to resolve ethical disagreements. I briefly examine the strengths and weaknesses of Confucianism and Legalism as potential sources of such a final vocabulary, but most of this essay focuses on Zhuangzian Daoism. Zhuangzi 莊子 provides many stories and metaphors that can inspire advocates of political pluralism. However, I suggest that Zhuangzi (...) is ultimately an “ironist” in Rorty’s sense. Many intellectuals assume there is something progressive and liberating about broadly ironic stances like relativism and skepticism. Ethically, though, irony is “the night in which all cows are black”: since it regards all positions as equally undermined, an ironic stance cannot be enlisted in support of tolerance or humanitarianism or in opposition to absolutism or cruelty. (shrink)

Han Fei (around 280 to 233 B.C.) advocates a strong and orderly state based on the absolute authority of the state and the law. Han Fei is usually not associated with human rights. His philosophy is difficult to reconcile with civil and political human rights, even if some of his political concepts support the realization of certain human rights. However, Han Fei’s ideas help us to gain a better understanding of the People’s Republic of China’s official human rights narrative. The (...) PRC emphasizes collective social and economic human rights, views the authority of the Communist Party as a prerequisite for the realization of human rights, and advocates rule by law, i.e. using the law as a tool of governance. This largely conforms to Han Fei‘s views on the role of the authority of the state and the law, and the relationship between the government and its citizens. (shrink)