Log in

View Full Version : The Rise of Atheism in Ancient China



Queercommie Girl
15th September 2010, 23:55
I feel that many Western socialists are rather ignorant of Chinese history, while Chinese socialists generally are not ignorant of Western history. This surely is an objective manifestation of the Eurocentric domination of recent centuries. (An analogy is that while many people from non-English speaking countries are fluent in English, the majority of English-speaking natives do not know another language, and this is a manifestation of the fact that English is the dominant language in the world today)

While I do not blame Western socialists for this, I'd really hope socialists can become more knowledgable about world history as a whole, rather than just about Western history. Indeed, for me the primary reason why the book A People's History of the World by Chris Harman of the British SWP is so good is because it overcame the Eurocentric perspective and really examined global history from a truly global perspective. As both Lenin and Mao said, there is much to be learned from the history of feudal and capitalist civilisations around the entire world.

In light of this, and the recent multiple threads on the topic of debate around "religion", I feel an analysis of the evolution of religious and atheist thought during China's classical period, (the so-called "Axial Age") what most Chinese Marxists consider to be the great transition from slavery to feudalism, when most of China's indigenous philosophical traditions, such as Confucianism and Daoism, were first created, would positively contribute to this debate.

The essential reactionary nature of religion is clearly seen in the fact that during classical China's slavery-feudalism transition, religious superstition was largely associated with the old and relatively reactionary slave-lord class, while rational atheism was largely associated with the new and relatively progressive feudal landlord class.

Here are excerpts from The History of Chinese Philosophy, a philosophy textbook written from a Marxist perspective first published in 1970s China by Beijing University Press, which illustrates this quite clearly: (translation by me)

Chapter One: The First Emergence of Chinese Philosophy

Section 1: Religious Thought during the Shang and Zhou Dynasties

The establishment of the Xia dynasty (circa 2000 BCE) was the formal beginning of Chinese slavery society. As society develops a slavery system, classes have clearly emerged, and the relationship between people has fundamentally transformed. In order to consolidate and defend their own political rule, the slave-lord aristocracy further developed and advanced the primitive religions of the tribal era. By this time, religion is no longer just "natural", but became a reflection of the class oppression that exists in society.

At the end of the 17th century BCE, king Tang of Shang destroyed the Xia dynasty, and established the Shang dynasty under slave-lord rule. As a slave-lord king that ruled over an united territory emerged, official religion must also create a new kind of Supreme God that would fit in with these new political characteristics. As Engels correctly pointed out, without an absolutist leader on earth, there can never be an absolutist god in heaven. The absolutist god in heaven is a manifestation of oriental despotism. In order to justify its own political rule, the slave-lord aristocracy of the Shang dynasty created a supreme ruler of everything in both heaven and earth, and in both nature and society, called Di or Shangdi. The ruling slave-lord aristocrats of the Shang stated: "Shangdi established a son who then gave birth to the Shang clan." (Shijing/Shangsong) That is to say, the ancestors of the ruling Shang clan is the son of Shangdi, and therefore the Shang royal family is the direct descendant of the Supreme God, and the most powerful slave-lord in Shang civilisation, wang or "king", became the official spokesperson on earth for Shangdi. The political reign of the Shang dynasty was granted by God himself, and therefore it is absolutely eternal; Every single command and statement issued by the Shang ruling clan are directly endorsed by God, and protected by the divine spirits. Anyone who dares to go against the will of the ruling Shang slave-lords is to disobey the Supreme God of heaven and earth, as well as the ancestral spirits, and therefore great disaster would surely fall upon them. According to ancient Chinese religious texts, during the era of high antiquity, the legendary rulers of China commanded the mythical figure Zhongli to block all direct access between earth and heaven (Shangshu/Luxing). What this means is that spiritual access between God and the human realm has now been limited and monopolised into the hands of the various officials of the ruling court, and the slave-lord king is the supreme leader of all of these officials. People during the Shang dynasty not only constantly made religious sacrifices to Heaven and the ancestors, in order to pray for good fortune and avert natural disasters, but before they do almost everything, including warfare, city construction, irrigation and agriculture, they would use divination to predict the outcome. Turtle shells and animal bones were burned, and the lines that formed during the burning process would be carefully observed by the diviner, in order to establish what the course of action should be.

Not only did the Shang rulers create this "supreme god" Shangdi, but they also theologically monopolised all spiritual access between God, the king, and the rest of the human realm. This way, the Shang slave-lord aristocracy became morally free to do whatever they wished. For their own private hedonistic enjoyment, not only do the Shang slave-lord aristocracy use a large number of slaves before their death, but even after they die, dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of slaves would also be used as human sacrifice for them. The slave-lords literally saw all of this as a part of their divine mandate from Shangdi the Supreme God. In their views, the sole purpose for the slaves' existence on earth is to guarantee the hedonistic enjoyment of their slave-lord masters by any means necessary. If the slaves ever dare to rebel against them even by a little bit, the slave-lords would loudly proclaim: "We only continue your existence based on our mandate of Heaven". (Shangshu/Pangengzhong) That is to say, the lives of the slaves are solely in existence due to the mandate of Heaven the slave-lords possess, and therefore if the slaves dare to disobey their masters, then God and the royal ancestral spirits in heaven would greatly punish them from on high, and then the slaves would be massacred and their entire clans exterminated without any mercy.

At the end of the 12th century BCE, the Zhou tribe began to emerge as a major local power in the frontier regions of Shang civilisation, in what is now the Wei River valley in Shaanxi province. First they destroyed the various Rong "barbarians" around their home area, and then they emerged as one of Shang dynasty's most powerful vassal states. Later as king Wu the Martial of the Zhou state marched eastwards, and with the help of the forcefully conscripted Shang slaves on the frontlines who completely rebelled and joined the Zhou army, the Shang dynasty was conquered by the Zhou and the Zhou dynasty was established in central China. The establishment of the Zhou dynasty signaled the highest degree of development of slavery civilisation in ancient China. The Zhou slave-lord aristocrats inherited the superstitious religious beliefs of their Shang predecessors based on making sacrifices to Heaven and the ancestors, revering the spirits, and the divine rights of kings. But on the basis of the official Shang religion, the Zhou made its theology more theoretically developed and more systematic. In order to consolidate its political rule over the conquered Shang subject peoples, the Zhou slave-lords first intrinsically separated God from the ancestral spirits in their official theology, and further strengthened the absolute theological authority of Shangdi the Supreme God. The Zhou formulated a political theology based on the Mandate of Heaven to justify their own political rule.

The destruction of the Shang polity by the Zhou is clearly a fatal blow to the absolutist and eternally unchanging "divine rights of kings for a particular ruling clan" promoted by the Shang slave-lord aristocracy to justify their own rule. In order to consolidate their own rule and to conquer their Shang subjects philosophically, the Zhou slave-lord aristocracy created the moralistic concept of "virtue" and the theological concept of "a ruler must have the necessary virtue to be fit to receive the Mandate of Heaven". In the classical Chinese text Shangshu (The Book of Ancient History) it is stated: "Only if the king carefully respects Virtue and utilises Virtue can the Mandate of Heaven be kept with us forever." That is to say, a king must be morally conscientious, keep his conduct to the standards of Virtue, does everything in a virtuous way, only this way can the king become worthy to receive and keep the heavenly mandate from God. The "virtue" promoted by the Zhou slave-lord aristocrats is in the concrete sense still based on the ideas of "obeying Heaven to conduct human affairs". This way Zhou theology has formulated a clear theoretical explanation for the fall of the once mighty Shang dynasty: the Shang dynasty fell because the descendants of the early Shang kings could not keep their virtue and follow the commands of Heaven. And since the ancestors of the Zhou ruling clan were able to increase its moral virtue in accordance with the Heavenly mandate, so God decided to change his "crown prince" on earth from the Shang to the Zhou. The famous Duke of Zhou, Dan, once spoke to the conquered Shang aristocrats: "It is not that our little state dares to offend the great Shang, but we are doing nothing more than following the Will of Heaven." (Shangshu/Duoshi)

The Duke Dan of Zhou, whom many later Chinese philosophers referred to as a "great sage", was the most famous and prominent politician and thinker of the early Western Zhou era. He was the younger brother of king Wu the Martial, and the uncle of king Cheng. In order to consolidate Zhou dynasty's rule, he initiated a series of policies and established an entire system of political theory. Not only did he elaborate on the concept of "virtue", but he also talked about "filial piety", and established many rules and rites of courtesy and music. The so-called "rites" were originally just basic rules for marriages, funerals, dress codes, eating habits, and the codes for travelling and staying at home, but through the systematic elaboration of the Duke of Zhou and later philosophers, they became an entire official system of ranks and titles in Chinese slavery society, and indeed "music" also became a tool for servicing this official slavery ranking system. Since the Duke of Zhou personally participated in the initial military march led by king Wu to conquer the Shang, and later also joined in the military campaigns to pacify the rebellions of the remanent Shang aristocrats, he clearly witnessed the major part rebelling slaves on the frontlines played in the downfall of the Shang dynasty. The Duke of Zhou learned something from this, and recognised the great power of the masses to some extent, so his theological understanding of "Heaven" became more developed. He established the doctrines of "The Way of Heaven is never constant" (Shijing/Daya/Wenwang) and "Heaven sees through the eyes of the people; Heaven hears through the ears of the people." (Shangshu/Taishi and Mengzi) On the basis of these concepts, he also introduced the political idea that a king must "protect his people" in order to "continue to enjoy the Mandate of Heaven" (Shangshu/Duofang). What this actually means is that the ruling slave-lords must work conscientiously and use good political management strategies, so that slaves can be protected and do not escape or become lost, and only this way can the political rule of the slave-lords be continuously kept.

The religious superstitions of the Shang and Zhou dynasties are essentially ideological weapons that exist to defend the political rule of the slave-lord aristocracy class. As slavery society itself emerges, develops and declines, these religions constantly change their form, but the essence, which is based on the "divine rights of kings", never shifts. The political dictatorship of the slave-lord aristocracy cannot exist without God protecting it, and indeed the later political dictatorship of the feudal landlord class cannot exist without God protecting it either, so the political theology based on the "divine rights of kings" also further developed to become one of the main ideological pillars of the subsequent 2000 years of Chinese feudal dictatorship.

... ...

Section 4: The Rise of Atheism

After the establishment of the Zhou dynasty (circa 1000 BCE) it soon encountered a major period of decline after a short period of prosperity under the reign of the kings Cheng and Kang. The slave-lord aristocracy's brutal plundering of ordinary freemen and slaves soon made class antagonisms increasingly intense. Ideologically, slaves and freemen first criticised the fact that the slave-lord aristocracy can acquire so much wealth without doing any work. They said: "You don't plant and you don't harvest, so how come your granaries are filled with three hundred tons of grains? You don't hunt and you don't fish, so how come your courts are decorated with so many animal skins?" (Shijing/Weifeng/Fahuan) The common people began to curse the kings and slave-lord aristocrats on earth first, then they began to criticise Heaven too. They began to say, oh Heaven, why do you not even provide us with enough food to eat? Why force us into such desperation? As criticisms of Heaven developed further, it became skepticism towards the official theology. The people began to realise that disasters in the human realm are never the result of "heavenly punishments", but are solely the result of human actions. Ideological liberation is usually the prelude to revolutionary action. The slaves could no longer bear the oppression and exploitation of the slave-lord aristocracy, at first they simply escaped away, later on they began to actively rebel by joining the rebellions of the ordinary freemen (the "middling layers" of Zhou society). In 841 BCE, the common freemen of the Zhou capital, the Guoren, used the widespread discontent among the slave population, and by politically uniting with the rebelling slaves, the Guoren freemen forced king Li of Zhou to abdicate and then exiled him, and thereby established a "republic" lasting for 14 years, the so-called "Gonghe republic" (from the reign year title of those 14 years, "Gonghe") or "Zhou-Zhao republic".

During the transition from the old slavery society to the new feudal society in the Spring and Autumn Period, the rise of atheism was a historical necessity. The minister Jiliang of the Sui state said: "The people are the roots of the gods. Therefore a sage-king must first satisfy the people and put religious matters second." (Zuozhuan/The Sixth Year of Duke Huan) That is to say, gods only have concrete power because of the people. So an ideal ruler must primarily focus on earthly rather than heavenly matters. The court historian of the Bao state also said: "I once heard: When a state is about to rise, it listens to its people; when a state is about to fall, it listens to the gods. Those gods that are truly good and wise always listen to the masses." (Zuozhuan/The Thirty-Second Year of Duke Zhuang) Although these people did not directly state that the gods simply don't exist, but they clearly emphasised the primary importance of humans as opposed to the gods, and recognised that people are the "roots" of the gods. In 645 BCE, shooting stars from heaven were observed in the State of Song, and there appeared strange natural phenomena such as birds flying backwards. Some superstitious people claimed that these are evil omens. But the court historian Shuxing countered: "These phenomena are simply the results of natural Yin-Yang interactions, they are not evil omens. Only people can create evil omens." (Zuozhuan/The Sixteenth Year of Duke Xi) Shuxing clearly recognised here that natural phenomena are no more than the occurrances of nature, there is absolutely no correlation with "good or bad omen" in the human realm. "Good" and "evil" are always human-created, they have absolutely nothing to do with the rewards or punishments of the gods. On the issue of how to build a city-wall, the representatives of the two states of Song and Xue had a major debate. The Song officials used divination as evidence, while the Xue officials used human affairs as evidence. Commenting on this debate, the official Mimuo stated: "The Xue depend on humans, while the Song depend on the gods, surely the Song are in the wrong." (Zuozhuan/The First Year of Duke Ding) From these commentaries, we can clearly see that the primitive materialists of those days not only recognised that in the relationship between humans and gods, humans are central and more important, but they even began to suggest that in the relationship between humans and nature, there is no place for gods at all. This way the status of humans have been further improved.

There is another Chinese philosopher of the Spring and Autumn Period who had atheist tendencies, he is Zichan from the State of Zheng. He was also one of the first people in China to publish a clear code of laws, and therefore he can be considered as a forerunner of the Legalist school of thought. Zichan once rebuked another official for claiming that the State of Zheng will face a major fire disaster due to astrological observations. He said: "The Way of Heaven is distant; While the Way of Man is near, since we cannot even reach Heaven, how can we claim to know so much about it? What do you know about the real Way of Heaven that you can say so much about it? How can people ever believe you?" (Zuozhuan/The Eighteenth Year of Duke Zhao) Zichan compared the "Way of Heaven" with the "Way of Man". He says that the Way of Heaven is illusory and distant, while the Way of Man is concrete and near, so the only rational way to analyse good and evil omens is to base it on human affairs. Zichan also opposed the religious ritual to offer sacrifices to Chinese dragons. He said: "We have nothing to do with the dragons, and the dragons have nothing to do with us." (Zuozhuan/The Nineteenth Year of Duke Zhao) There is simply no correlation between humans and dragons at all, so what is the point of offering sacrifices to it?

Among the atheist philosophers that operated during the end of the Spring and Autumn Period, many were thinkers representing relatively progressive political forces, such as Zichan of the Zheng state mentioned above. During this period of radical transition in society, they claimed that the roots of all good and evil lie not with Heaven, but with Man, this demonstrates their skeptical attitudes towards the gods. To a certain extent they have correctly observed that all the problems of human society are essentially problems between man and man, not the problems between Heaven and man or the gods and man. This corresponds with their own political and socio-economic positions at the time, as representatives of the newly emerging feudal landlord class that tries to win over people's hearts in order to politically struggle against the ruling slave-lord aristocracy. Objectively, this had the effects of liberating the masses to some extent from the authority of Heaven and the gods.

Queercommie Girl
16th September 2010, 00:02
Here is some background information on classical China's slavery-feudalism transition, from the same book:

The economic characteristic of the ancient Chinese slavery system is that the slave-lord aristocracy directly possesses both land and slaves, and sometimes gives some of them out to clan and tribal relatives and political allies through the "well-fields" and "title-granting" systems. Through this vassal states of various types are established to defend the entire economic system of slavery. By the Western Zhou dynasty, there emerged an explicit and absolute political system of hereditary succession based on bloodlines among the various ranks of the ruling slave-lord aristocratic class. The various ranks of the slave-lords enjoy multiple privileges in the economic, political and legal senses. According to the Chinese classical text Shangshu/Tangshi, oppressed slaves insulted the last king of the slave-lord Xia dynasty (circa 1600 BCE) thus: "Oh you great sun, when shall you perish? We'd rather be destroyed with you than to continue living like this!" From this one can clearly see the discontent among the slaves towards the ruling slave-lords. Another example is that when the Zhou dynasty rose up to overthrow the Shang dynasty (circa 1046 BCE), the tens of thousands of slaves who were forced to the frontlines by the Shang dynasty all rebelled against their lords and joined the Zhou forces, thus completely destroying the Shang polity. From this one can see the intense class antagonisms within slavery society.

... ...

By the end of the Western Zhou period, Chinese slavery began to break apart. The period from 770 BCE to 403 BCE is usually called the Spring and Autumn Period, it is a transitional period from slavery to feudalism in China. During this period, due to advances in productive tools, especially the beginning of using iron tools and using oxen to plow the fields, productive forces were further developed. At the same time, increasing numbers of slave rebellions and escapes meant that the old slavery system is more and more becoming a fetter to the development of productivity. At this time, in some of the Zhou dynasty's vassal states, certain slave-lords, in order to acquire greater wealth and power, began to either force or hire slaves to develop originally barren lands outside the legally assigned lands they received from the ruling Zhou slave-lords. This way more and more privately-owned lands appeared, and feudal relations of production began to emerge. In 594 BCE, the "land tax laws" of the State of Lu became the earliest explicit legal article to formally recognise the new landlord class in history, it legally affirmed the formal legal status of acquired private feudal lands outside the originally assigned territories given by the Zhou slave-lord king. From then on the newly arisen landlord class has been formally recognised by law, and officially entered into the pages of history. After this, other major Zhou vassal states such as Qi, Jin and Zheng all initiated similar feudal reforms, and the feudal landlord class gradually acquired economic and political advantage over the old slave-lord class. Through repeated struggles over a long period, by the Warring States Period, the feudal system became formally established in China.

During the Spring and Autumn Period, the antagonisms between the newly arisen feudal landlord class and the old slave-lord aristocracy became increasingly intense. During this society-transforming era of struggle, the new landlord class only managed to overcome the power of the slave-lord aristocracy by using the power of the slaves and the ordinary freemen. Through various means, such as tax reduction, disaster relief and meritocratic rewards, the landlords attracted escaped slaves and won people's hearts, in order to strengthen their own political and economic power. For instance, the Tian clan in the State of Qi relied on the power of the people through its six decades of political and economic struggles against the old ruling slave-lord aristocracy in Qi from 532 BCE to 475 BCE. During this period, the Tian clan engaged in three armed struggles against the old slave-lord aristocracy, and only through these did they manage to acquire political power in Qi. Similarly, in the old slave-lord State of Jin, through numerous attempts at political and military struggle, the three feudal clans of Han, Zhao and Wei managed to partition the Jin state and established three new feudal nations on its carcass.

Turinbaar
16th September 2010, 01:26
Do you know how these atheists faired under Qin Shi huangdi? As I understand it the God Emperor principle was consummated as the unifying principle of a new feudal China.

Queercommie Girl
18th September 2010, 20:03
Do you know how these atheists faired under Qin Shi huangdi? As I understand it the God Emperor principle was consummated as the unifying principle of a new feudal China.

As I understand it, during the initial stages of a transitional period from one kind of society to another, such as during the early days of feudalism-capitalism transition in Europe, there were many relatively progressive features. Indeed, in Europe, the rise of rationalism and secularism occurred during the feudalism-capitalism transition.

On a lower level this also happened during the ancient Chinese slavery-feudalism transition. But the transition from slavery to feudalism or from feudalism to capitalism isn't like the transition from capitalism to socialism. They are still one ruling and exploiting class replacing another ruling and exploiting class. So what usually happens is that actually some of the progressive gains during the initial period of transition are actually reversed when the new type of class society becomes consolidated. For instance read the chapter "The Retreat of Reason" in Chris Harman's A People's History of the World - the bourgeois, after initially using rationalism to fight against the superstition of the feudal aristocracy in Europe, later on began to use some of the same kind of religious oppression themselves to hold down the working masses. On a lower level, something similar to this also happened during the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition. The new feudal dictatorships of the Qin and Western Han soon created their own political theology and suppressed free speech that went against the feudal government. (E.g. the First Emperor Qin Shihuang's famous "burning of the books")

However, having said this, feudalism was still on the whole relatively more progressive than slavery. The political theology of the feudal dictatorship was still significantly more rational and less superstitious compared with the old slave-lord political theology of Shang and Zhou times. Human sacrifice became legally banned and essentially disappeared from China. Slaves became free small peasants and serfs who had a small amount of social rights, rather than being directly owned by their masters. The official theology of the imperial state in the feudal era also became more sophisticated and naturalistic. Divination based on burning tortoise shells and animal bones disappeared as a religious practice, replaced by more philosophical analysis of the natural world based on the theories of Yin-Yang and the Five Phases/Elements.

So although both the slave-lord and landlord classes utilised political theology to justify their dictatorial rule, there was still a qualitative difference between the contents of their respective theologies. Feudal theology was still qualitatively better and more progressive compared with slave-lord theology. Although the initial upsurge of populist primitive atheism was suppressed by the later consolidated feudal dictatorship, the feudal emperors of imperial China actually incorporated some elements of atheist and materialist thinking into their own political theology, making it more sophisticated, philosophical and naturalistic.

ÑóẊîöʼn
18th September 2010, 21:51
As a point of comparison, around what time did similar thinking arise in Europe?

Queercommie Girl
18th September 2010, 21:59
As a point of comparison, around what time did similar thinking arise in Europe?

Well some people have pointed out the formal similarities between the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition and the European feudalism-capitalism transition. The European transition happened much later, starting from the Renaissance period, some 500 years ago, rather than 2500 years ago. But it was also at a qualitatively higher level.

Also, in ancient Greece, a similar kind of major social transition occurred at around the same time as Spring and Autumn Period and Warring States Period China. That was when things like classical Greek philosophy and Athenian democracy emerged. Ancient India also experienced a major social transition at around the same time, that's when Hinduism was reformed and Buddhism first emerged. Some scholars call this period of "philosophical awakening" the "Axial Age". But mainstream academics don't really appreciate the underlying socio-economic causes for such intellectual creativity.

In classical Greece, technically it wasn't the transition from slavery to feudalism, but rather the transition from a kind of aristocratic tribalism to a relatively advanced merchantile kind of slavery. Greek slavery was generally more advanced than Chinese and Indian slavery, but European feudalism was less advanced than Chinese and Indian feudalism.

Kiev Communard
19th September 2010, 21:56
Well some people have pointed out the formal similarities between the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition and the European feudalism-capitalism transition. The European transition happened much later, starting from the Renaissance period, some 500 years ago, rather than 2500 years ago. But it was also at a qualitatively higher level.

Also, in ancient Greece, a similar kind of major social transition occurred at around the same time as Spring and Autumn Period and Warring States Period China. That was when things like classical Greek philosophy and Athenian democracy emerged. Ancient India also experienced a major social transition at around the same time, that's when Hinduism was reformed and Buddhism first emerged. Some scholars call this period of "philosophical awakening" the "Axial Age". But mainstream academics don't really appreciate the underlying socio-economic causes for such intellectual creativity.

In classical Greece, technically it wasn't the transition from slavery to feudalism, but rather the transition from a kind of aristocratic tribalism to a relatively advanced merchantile kind of slavery. Greek slavery was generally more advanced than Chinese and Indian slavery, but European feudalism was less advanced than Chinese and Indian feudalism.

Excuse me for such observation, but I think that the dichotomy of "slavery - feudalism" as regards Chinese history is mostly imported from the simple extrapolation from the Europeam circumstances, and when we talk about the socioeconomic history of China, as well as of many other pre-capitalist class societies we must bear in mind that chattel slavery and exploitation of peasant communities by individual landowners were not the only modes of exploitation. In fact, Soviet sinologist Ilyushechkin argues that the basic mode of exploitation in pre-capitalist China society could be more reasonably called a "leasehold exploitation", as the peasants were not personally dependent on their landlords, unlike in classical feudal societies of Europe, being exploited solely through more "economic" means, while Yuri Semyonov regards the pre-capitalist Chinese history to be "Polito-Magnarian" one, that is based on the combined system of etatist exploitation of the peasantry by the strata of the ruling class acting as a state apparatus (Politarism) with the exploitation of landless peasants living on the leased lands by the landowners (Magnarism).

Queercommie Girl
19th September 2010, 22:07
Excuse me for such observation, but I think that the dichotomy of "slavery - feudalism" as regards Chinese history is mostly imported from the simple extrapolation from the Europeam circumstances, and when we talk about the socioeconomic history of China, as well as of many other pre-capitalist class societies we must bear in mind that chattel slavery and exploitation of peasant communities by individual landowners were not the only modes of exploitation. In fact, Soviet sinologist Ilyushechkin argues that the basic mode of exploitation in pre-capitalist China society could be more reasonably called a "leasehold exploitation", as the peasants were not personally dependent on their landlords, unlike in classical feudal societies of Europe, being exploited solely through more "economic" means.

It has to be said that Ilyushechkin's views here are rather incomplete, because direct serfdom did exist in feudal China, or at least certain periods during feudal Chinese history. (Generally speaking, serfdom was still very common in the earlier part of feudal China, it was only in the later dynasties that leasehold landlordism took over as the main form of economic exploitation) And even if peasants are not personally bond to the land and dependent on the landlords, the predominant socio-economic productive relation is still by definition landlordism, just a slightly different kind of landlordism from the ancient European one. (It is technically wrong to say that "leasehold landlordism is not landlordism and only direct serfdom is landlordism". Such a view is too narrow, just as there are different variants of capitalism: democratic capitalism, state capitalism etc, there are also different variants of feudalism, serfdom is not the only form of feudalism)

In addition, to put all of "pre-capitalist China" into one category in terms is productive relation is clearly mistaken, since there was a major transition during the Zhou dynasty from roughly 1000 BCE to 200 BCE. Before this transition, the dominant form of economic relation in China was direct slavery, associated with a theocratic political system and wide-spread human sacrifice, similar in some ways to the slavery systems of the Aztec and Inca empires. But after this transition, landlordism became the dominant economic relation, the political superstructure became more humanistic, and human sacrifice disappeared.

So to say that the ancient Chinese socio-economic system was "slavery" and "feudal" is not simply copying an European model onto China, because it does recognise the concrete differences between European Slavery (Greece and Rome) and Chinese Slavery (Shang and Zhou), and between European Feudalism (Middle Ages) and Chinese Feudalism (Qin to Qing). But the terms "slavery" and "feudalism" are still used because by definition despite the obvious differences, fundamentally what ancient China had were still slavery and feudal systems in the intrinsic sense, based on direct slave ownership and landlordism respectively. This actually objectively affirms the universal truth of Marxist historiography.

ÑóẊîöʼn
23rd September 2010, 03:07
Well some people have pointed out the formal similarities between the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition and the European feudalism-capitalism transition. The European transition happened much later, starting from the Renaissance period, some 500 years ago, rather than 2500 years ago. But it was also at a qualitatively higher level.

What does this mean exactly? A higher level of what?

Queercommie Girl
19th October 2010, 00:16
What does this mean exactly? A higher level of what?

The Chinese slavery-feudalism transition occurred 2000 years before the European Renaissance. Back then technology and productivity were at a much lower level. Base determines superstructure so when the base is more primitive, the superstructure is more primitive too.

Dimentio
19th October 2010, 16:09
In Europe, the transition between slavery and feudalism was in fact characterised by more religious fervor and a decline of sciences and learning.

Queercommie Girl
19th October 2010, 16:27
In Europe, the transition between slavery and feudalism was in fact characterised by more religious fervor and a decline of sciences and learning.

Which is why I said Chinese slavery/feudalism and European slavery/feudalism are not the same and the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition is in many ways more akin to the European feudalism-capitalism transition.

Both the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition and the European feudalism-capitalism transition occurred within, whereas the European slavery-feudalism transition happened through an external force destroying the old slave-lord Roman empire.

Roman slavery was the most advanced slavery system in the ancient world, (Rome had no direct human sacrifice - a common feature of most slavery societies, only slave gladiators fighting to the death, which is a more developed form of "human sacrifice", and one gladiator actually became emperor) but early European feudalism was one of the least developed feudal systems in history. So it created a few centuries of "dark ages" in Europe.

These things are always complex and are never in black-and-white.

JosefStalinator
23rd October 2010, 21:03
Is it truly atheist when you've got people still believing in superstition and spirits?

Queercommie Girl
1st November 2010, 17:44
Is it truly atheist when you've got people still believing in superstition and spirits?

That's Chinese folk religion. The primitive materialists in ancient China, like their counterparts in ancient Greece, did not believe in spirits.

However, just like in ancient times, the masses of Greece in general still believed in the gods and pagan rituals regardless of what their few rational philosophers said, it is the same thing in ancient China.

Queercommie Girl
1st November 2010, 17:51
Is it truly atheist when you've got people still believing in superstition and spirits?

I certainly don't believe in "spirits" but from an epistemological point of view, the pagan belief in "spirits" is still superior to the dogmatic "faith" of monotheists.

The belief in "spirits" fails as a matter of evidence, not as a matter of principle. Because you can't actually metaphysically rule out the existence of "spirits" in the concrete objective sense. What if "spirits" are actually aliens existing in energy form from another dimension? I know this is very far-fetched but you cannot automatically rule out this potential possibility within a scientific view of the universe. All you can say is that as of yet, every single proposed "evidence" for the existence of "spirits" has been found to be lacking.

This is similar in some ways to the supposed alien sightings and UFOs etc. You cannot completely rule out in principle the potential possibility of aliens coming to visit earth on a spaceship, given how large the universe is and the fact that life can rise naturally. All you can say is that so far not a single piece of "evidence" for UFOs etc actually stands up to scientific scrutiny.

However, the idea of God in orthodox theology, is fundamentally a meaningless one as many philosophers have suggested, it can never be empirically proven or dis-proven even in principle.

heiss93
1st November 2010, 22:35
What is your opinion of the Criticize Lin Biao and Confucius campaign of 1974?

As I understand it, Maoist historiography attempted to paint a picture of Confucianism as reactionary from its' birth, and as a defender of slave-owning ideology against feudalism. How does this fit with the adaptation of Confucianism as the dominant ideology of feudalism for over 1000 years?

This is a good sample article from the period-
http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/PR1975/PR1975-02b.htm

Queercommie Girl
1st November 2010, 23:26
What is your opinion of the Criticize Lin Biao and Confucius campaign of 1974?

As I understand it, Maoist historiography attempted to paint a picture of Confucianism as reactionary from its' birth, and as a defender of slave-owning ideology against feudalism. How does this fit with the adaptation of Confucianism as the dominant ideology of feudalism for over 1000 years?

This is a good sample article from the period-
http://www.massline.org/PekingReview/PR1975/PR1975-02b.htm

Actually the Maoist idea is that Confucianism at its initial stage was indeed largely reactionary, since it attempted to defend the old slavery system.

The real "progressive" ideologies of the day (2500 years ago) were Legalism, Sunzi's Art of War military philosophy and Mohism. Daoism is "partially progressive" in a negative sense. Daoism represented the ideology of the degenerate petit-slavelords, it can be compared with certain strands of degenerate petit-bourgeois ideology today like post-modernism.

However, it's not that simple. "Confucianism" was never a monolithic edifice. By the time of Mencius in the 4th century BCE, it actually changed into an ideology for the newly emerging landlord class. Because to find employment, this new generation of Confucian literati represented by Mencius had to serve the interests of their feudal landlord masters. By this time (the Warring States) the slavelord class in China was already on the verge of fading away completely. So what Mencian Confucianism represented was actually a kind of "feudal reformist" ideology - mainly feudal but also advocating keeping a few features of slavery society intact rather than the more "feudal revolutionary" thinkers like Sunzi who advocated completely destroying all vestiges of slavery society.

By the Qin and Western Han dynasties, Confucianism was reformed again by the philosopher Dong Zhongshu. By this time, it became an official ideology solely serving the interests of the feudal landlord class. So you see the "orthodox Confucianism" that was the official ideology in China for 2000 years was not the original slavery-defending ideology of Confucius, but the version of "Confucianism" that has been revised by Dong Zhongshu to fit into a feudal paradigm.

Also, the real "revolutionary" philosophy of the era, Legalism, which was the official ideology of the Qin state that unified all of China in 221 BCE, actually originated as a branch of Confucianism as well. The first Legalist thinkers, Han Feizi and Li Si, were students of the Confucian philosopher Xunzi. Xunzi however was different from Mencius. Whereas Mencius represented the more "moderate" wing of Confucianism, Xunzi represented its more "radical" wing.

It should also be noted that the "official ideology" of imperial China since the Qin unification was never just Confucianism, but actually a combination of Confucianism and Legalism.

So to sum up, the original "Confucianism" of Confucius himself was like keynesianism that tried to defend the slavery system, albeit a relatively humane version of it; the modified "Confucianism" of Mencius was like social democracy in that it believed in the new feudal system (unlike Confucius himself) but advocated gradual transition rather than abrupt radical change; the modified "Confucianism" of Xunzi was like a more radical version of social democracy that eventually developed into Legalism, the "revolutionary ideology" of the early feudal era and the official ideology of the first feudal empire in Chinese history, the Qin. The orthodox form of Confucianism that was finalised by Dong Zhongshu during the Western Han was like a mature version of feudal Confucianism for the kind of feudalism that has completely lost its "revolutionary" drive.

Of course, as I have said already in this post, feudalism replacing slavery is fundamentally different from socialism replacing capitalism. It was one ruling class replacing another, not the abolishment of class society. So just like the feudalism-capitalism transition in Europe, during which despite the anti-feudal slogans promoted by the capitalists, once capitalist rule consolidated itself, it began to use basically the same instruments of oppression as the feudal lords did before them, such as for instance the Church. Of course, capitalist Christianity was still generally speaking more developed than feudal Christianity. The same logic applies to the Chinese slavery-feudalism transition and Confucianism.

As for the anti-Lin Biao campaigns during the Cultural Revolution. I think one problem with the Cultural Revolution is that culturally speaking it became ultra-leftist. Culturally it tried to reject every aspect of what it thought of as "feudal" or "capitalist" culture. It was not just Confucianism and traditional Chinese culture that was totally rejected, but also traditional Western culture like classical music and painting. I think this is partly a mistake because history is always the dialectical unification of continuity and change. Lenin calls on socialists to inherit positive aspects of old civilisations, rather than completely rejecting them wholesale.