Page 89 - 2022(1) International Confusion Studies

82 L. Du

to some Chinese scholars, who expected to see it fall into the category of traditional
authority (Mao, 2001, p. 87; Yue, 2006, p. 220).
Weber’s types of “legitimate authority (合法统治)” were imported into China
from the West, while the concept and theory of “ethics-politics (伦理政治)” were
home-grown, representing Chinese scholars’ self-understanding of the Chinese
political tradition and political thought. “Ethics-politics” advanced first by Liang
Qichao (梁启超 1873–1929) about 100 years ago, summarized his perception of the
close connections between ethics and politics in ancient China. According to him,
the perfect clan organization blurred the boundary between family and state,
shaping the Chinese style of government closely connected with ethics (Liang,
1996, pp. 44–48). Liang Shuming (梁漱溟 1893–1988) stated that this constituted a
striking characteristic of Chinese political practice, which was heavily intertwined
and integrated with ethics (Dai & Jiang, 2001, p. 272). Some contemporary Chinese
scholars have inherited this view and developed it rather systematically (Yang,
2007, pp. 373–374) “political model” and a “cultural type” characterized by the
“homogeneity (同构同化)” of ethics and politics: “Political issues are measured by
ethical standards (伦理标准) and ethical rules (伦理规则) are implemented by
political control” (Ren, 2005, pp. 28–29).
This article argues that none of Weber’s three types of legitimate authority
corresponds to the political structure that existed in ancient China or the ideal
framework advcated in Confucianism. And “ethics-politics” can act as the fourth
type of legitimate authority, which may serve as a reference when comparing the
political systems and ideas of China and the West.

2 “Ethics-Politics” as the Fourth Type of
Legitimate Authority

Weber labeled the model of government in ancient China “charismatic” because
adversity (such as a defeat in a war, a drought or a flood) would force a monarch to
repent publicly or even abdicate. It indicated that the monarch had lost
his “charisma (魅力)” or “virtue (德)” (Du, 2018, pp. 66–69), as mandated by
Heaven/Tian (天), and was no longer a legitimate “son of Tian” (天子). Weber
captured the core of political legitimacy in ancient China, namely that the legiti-
macy of a monarch was built on his virtues, but he erroneously equated “virtue”
with “charisma”. According to him, “charisma” was “above the everyday life”
(Weber, 1980, p. 142), that is, transcendent. “Virtue” nevertheless has been infused
into China’s political daily routines ever since the rulers of the Western Zhou
Dynasty advocated the legitimacy theory of “virtuous practice being worthy of the