pores 2 Sour Gompen-qns SMU, ,TOREMA aIAD Jo Bapr amp se Gans ‘uORIpED srmeoygndas asourig omy wr sbapt pQay ami PASON axe T ATOMS s70HD ‘unpow pre FUND [eoOHPEN uosKIeq soAMUIOD puR seRMURAOSE tog are axoqy, tompEn asianp pee payeoqdamon v oq Inq rouNED ArT AO Sqr JO sTEOK QOO' sey UE ANUNOD aSrBI v UI KLOIsty Jo sIBOK QOT SET tm women y asudims ¥ se amo 08 PMO SAL wasENORgndas CHeisON, ox stopr pub use MON] se—pE Jo spLGAT are am0s Inq ydos ond ywonrod wspryEoD yeHONIPER wo IMaINBIP spores are $e=pr osomH Jp dunog “trog sea, wo: as asonmI on, ,SmpTUA ax, Peaxds (ep S108) ana ous pre ‘(anu ax) jdoad au “(una OF8) uozne “oy $403) ongndat w ‘(womb wu) Kyufiaranos saydoad “(Suaye wx) wstfexoRMpsI09 “(rok 12) Kuogy se yons seapr uroqqndes op ‘eipom juud- ieadod amp ySnony, “ws Aq wUNID yoo) msrreongndar “Amato WOZ op JO TIM xp punore “oBe szeak poxpany » moqe sey JOE} TBOONSA| IUESLTUaNS w st. "payee aAsu pey wonrpen ysreogndas asomg om 3 se Aqdosonyd yeonod weponyuo; axtsar oy st op o} SuAn axe suy[oqos osomp eq, “‘PauoRUoMT jou are woRIpe wereaqandan sseurG ‘ap wy samy smetodem ofp Jo 1s0HN “(66-O6T) UHSBUOZ NOYK AIqEIOT 80 ‘sujongtog anoNy om $8 GonS LASTTERYTOD aAtAaH 0 Pag Os PE Oy esomD adsoxo Amano Tp6T oye] am) saye semag wopou Aases Ing ‘GoM WON 0D WorssHp om Pu suoUAWY ‘MINFEED are psionb snuonboy oUt are Fe, argue Mog om Jo SUHBAg amy pe AIUD MAST axe] om Pores JE wonpEN ystavoNgndar asouMID am you mq ‘OE GL4-I¢s) snIOTTOD oy 3009 s008 yer Aydosormd TeopHod weNUOD jeuoRIpen amp vodn wep ‘oq mommazo0 wt Bonn uo areys Aadosomrgd yeoRjod WePRYUOD wo SUpON. ‘repos ou ¢Mepoy Ansnpar afepoo Hmuord wey e st AqdosomNd Toon sjod wepnyuod, oxy ur dmsrejoyos eonBixe ysysUg om UF TORUDH JO 10] Somyo8 tog seu ‘Puooes amp you Ing “Ixy ORL, ¢ Buoys wre) sTeUORTNNS 800 10 (ey Suo8) wasmmeoygndar st puoses ain paw (envoys myzSuaye fru) Aydosomd twonned walonguod sf yxy om — seouddmsor ajguyTenia: coms uaeq aang aaomp So6gT aT om sou wD PuEpUREN UF sxejoqos SuoMTY opiy suvx vorrpen ysrueoyqndar 9soUTYD ey} UI UoNeUTMOp-uoU se AraqrT sSujuurseq uvoygqndey 6 2nos a anv Noanor amprmnn et s10z abpapnoy i oouer YysIey pue yeay yoosp-une 4q pompa BIS JSvoyVION, Ul WusTUKOTqnday138 Yang Xiao the Athenian sub-tradition of the Chinese republicanist tradition. In this essay, I focus on a different sub-tradition, which may be called the Roman sub-tradition of Chinese republicanism. What is most striking about this sub- tradition, as I argue in this chapter, is that they were connected and unified by that the opposite of freedom or being free (ci you) is slavery (nu yu) or being a slave (nu t people are free when they are citizens (guo min) in a cording to the Reformers) or a republic (accord- ‘would have been impossible without the republican idea of liberty. The Chinese term ‘zi you’, like the English terms ‘liberty’ or ‘ seemts to be the ‘contested concept par excellence’ (Palonen 2003: 95). This is true of the concept of liberty in China as well. The concept of liberty has been heatedly contested in China, and will continue to be so in the future. The goal century. We may take 2003 as an important year in this con- year when Zou Xiang Gong He (Towards the Republic), am historical TV drama series covering the end of Qing imperial China and the founding of the Republic of China, was broadcast in China. In the final speech by Sun Yat-sen, he talked about the lack of the rule of law, transpar- ency and the separation of powers, and how it led to corruption in the Republic of China, and how the constitution was manipulated by those ‘who were in power. The speech included the following lines: ‘A republic is 8 country of liberty, and liberty is a human right given by Heaven ... If a republic is a false one, then hhave is a true tyranny [zhuan zhi]... Ifa republic is a false one, then What we hav ‘parts of the speech, including the lines ited, were censored when it was broadcast in 2003. However, the 5 the full speech could be found easily on the internet. People also commented on the fact that these lines were censored. ‘It must be pointed out that these are the TV series writers’ words, put that they were meant to be about what is going on right now in the People’s Republic of China, Since the tum of the 2ist century, there fas also been an increasingly large body of scholarly literature on the period between the end g enslaved [bei mu yu}.’ Some Republican beginnings 139 of imperial China and the founding of the People's Republic of China, The parallel between that period and today must have been too obvious to be lost to anyone. For those who have been trying to revive republicanism in China, there are Tessons they can learn from the frst beginning, as well as from the recent revival of republicanism in the West. Another sign that there may have been @ second republican beginning, in words if not in deeds, is that there have been increasingly large numbers of Chinese translations of books on republicanism seult Honoban has made the observation that there are three which civic republican revival has taken place in the West since ry of political thought (Hanna Arendt, J.G.A. Pocock, Quentin Skinner); 2 constitutional legal theory (Cass Sunstein and Frank Michelman); and 3 normative political theory Philip Pettit, Richard Dagger, Michael Sandel) We may also add: 4 the history of the American Revolution (Arendt, Pocock, Bernard Bailyn, Joyce Appleby, Gordon Wood); and 5 intemational relations and law (lames Bohman, M.NS, Sellers, Cécile Laborde) Many of these important works in English have been translated into Chi- nese? Major classical texts in the republicanist tradition have also been ‘translated."® As is well known, the normative republicanism in the legal and politcal theory in the republicanism revival in the West has been id Wood's work on the history of the Amer- rk on the history of republicanism ia the 0 turn out to be fruitful, 4 type of justification of the Qing Dynasty yhat may be called legitimacy through benevolent ‘governance, which is a particular case of a more general ‘performance-based justification’, to borrow an idea from Pettit or ‘service conception of authority’, to borrow a term from Joseph Raz and Joseph Chan. I focus on the version articulated by Zhang Zhidong (1837-1908), arguably the most important and influential opponent of the republicanists. In section two, ‘non-domination should be taken as a ‘Western’ or a ‘Chinese’ value. 1 The term ‘zi you? (iberty, freedom) does not appear in any classical texts in carly China, As we can see from a 17th-century vernacular novel, ‘zi you’ simply means the lack of interference or restraints on one's physical move- ‘ment.!! However, when we fast forward to the late 1890s, we see that ‘ri you" hhas become a master concept in political discourse in popular newspapers, ‘magazines and pamphlets. Although non-interference remains part of the140 Yang Xiao ‘meaning, a radically new meaning seems to have been added to the word by ‘the Chinese republicanists. The new meaning is that zi you (liberty or free dom) is the opposite of zhuan zhi (domination, tyranny), and to be zi you (free) is to be a citizen (guo min) in a constitutional monarchy or republic. By the same token, to be bu zi you (unfree) is to be a subject in a tyranny (Chuan zhi), which is no different from being a slave (nu Ii). How should we ‘understand these statements by the republicanists? Why did they need such a conception of liberty? What purposes did it serve? To answer these questions, we need to take a close look at Zhang Zhidong, arguably the most influential opponent of the republican concept of liberty. Why should we look at the opponents of the republicanists? In his study of ‘Hobbes, Quentin Skinner emphasizes. the importance of taking seriously how Hobbes’s contemporary opponents tnderstood him. Collingwood emphasizes that to understand a Philosophical position it is necessary to understand intended to deny’, and tended to express the rejection several provinces for more than 20 years, enabled him to become an indispensable con: the late Qing government, one feature of wi rmulating domestic and especially diplomatic policies was largely exercised by the govemors general, through the medium of their memorials’, and he eventually became ‘the leading elder statesman in the capital, serving as srand secretary and grand councilor in special charge of supervising the new Ministry of Education’ (Teng and Fairbank 1970: 164). He was a driving force behind the seifstrengthening movement 5), which started the modernization of the Chinese military, railway, education and popular print ‘media, He supported certain social reforms, such as the movement to abolish foot-binding. However, he was opposed to political reform, and radical ideas associated with it such as min quan (peopl reignty) and zi you (liberty). ‘He articulated his main ideas in his 1898 book Quan xue pian (Exhortation to Study), which was endorsed by the Emperor.!2 ‘The most interesting part of Exhortation to Study is Zhang's justification of the legitimacy of the Qing imperial rule, He makes use of the idea of ren zheng (benevolent governance),!? which was first articulated by Mencius 85-312 nce), Mencius argues that rulers who send people to die in aggres- s who take away people’ livelihood through heavy taxation from those who kill an innocent person with a knife , 1A4, 3B8). One essential component of Mencius’s ren zheng Republican beginnings 141 start with land demarcation’ demarcate lands and how and no one is cold or hungry ruler’s first priority ought to be taking caze of the weak, the poor, the elderly 1A7, 1B5), Another obligation of a good ruler is 30 believes that a good ruler does not govern through physical force but rather through moral education and virtuous actions of the ruler. In otter words, only a benevolent ruler can be a legitimate one, We may call this legitimacy through benevolent governance’. Zhang's justification of the legitimacy of Qing imperial rule takes exactly such an approach: ‘No Dynasty since the Han [206 scr-220] and Tang [618 907] has exhibited a greater benevolence toward its subjects than our Holy Qing’ Zhang et al. 1998: 9709). Zhang then proceeds to elaborate the Qing court’s 15 major accomplishments in terms of ‘ren zheng’. For example, the first achievement is ‘benevolent governance in reducing tax” (bo fu ren zheng), and he gives concrete figures to show that the Qing court has been steadily reducing taxes (ibid.: 9710), Zhang also claims that the Qing court has con- tributed millions of taels of silver to the victims of major natural di such as floc predecessors’ ( forces people to serve paid for their services Zhang concludes: ies, and it always makes sure that the troops are 1712). After having listed all these achievements, So far I have only mentioned some,of the most important accomplish- ‘ments of the Qing court; there are still countless moze good laws and policies that Ihave not mentioned ... Does any government of the foreign countries present such a record of generosity, benevolence, diligence, and honesty as ours? Although China is not wealthy and powerful, her people > of whatever condition, rich or poor, high or low, all enjoy'a free and happy life. Although the Wester countries are much stronges, the lower classes ofthe people are miserable, unhappy, and maliciously treated. But there is no redress, and that is wity they rise in rebellion on every oppor- tunity, and not a year passes without reports of the murder of some king or the stabbing of some minister. We can then conclude that the {governments of these countries are not as good as the Chinese goverament. (Zhang et al. 1998: 9714)!* ‘The original phrase that I here translated as ‘a free and happy life’ is ‘fayang ‘kuanran youyi zile’ (FAS VA & 8), in which the word ‘zi you’ (free) did not appear.!> Zhang uses a vivid and stylish phrase to describe how people live ther lives in a relaxing way, with alot of fee space fuyang kuanran), and enjoy themselves (cle). It is indeed appropriate to translate it as ‘a free and happy life’142 Yang Xiao The current Chinese government's justification of the legitimacy of its rule seems to be a vatiation of Zhang's approach. One leader has recently claimed that people have the right to the pursuit of happiness, and promoting people's happiness should be the duty of the government. One of the most articulate versions can be found in the writings by Kang Xiaoguang, who is an inffu- ential scholar-official (Kang 2004; also see Kang 2005). Kang’s doctrine of benevolent governance as the legitimacy of authoritarian government is clearly a duplicate version of Zhang's doctrine. 2 I now show that Yan Fu’s concept of liberty as non-domination might have ‘been exactly what he-needed in order to, respond to Zhang Zhidong’s benevolent-governance-based argument. The main idea is that the people Zhang claims to be ‘happy’ are actually not ‘free’, because they are not citi- zens, but slaves, In this section I focus on Yan Fu, and I tum to other republicanists of the same period in the next section. ear whether Yan Fu was the first to speak of liberty as the liberty, and he seemed to be one of the few people who directly responded to Zhang's argument. For example, although he did not explicitly refer to ‘Study, Yan must have had Zhang's benevolent- tion in mind when he argued in his 1905 Lectures possible that the government is benevolent and kind, but, (Yan and Wang 1986: 1283). ‘Yan was arguably the most influential public intellectual of his time, Almost without exception, all the major figures in modern Chinese history, such as Mao Zedong, Hu Shi and Lu Xun, have mentioned how they were awakened and transformed by reading Yan Fu’s translations. Yan entered the Fuzhou Navy Yard School when he was 12 years old, and he spent four years in the English division of the school (1867-71). He went to England and studied at the Royal Naval College, Greenwich (1877-79).'6 After he returned to China, he eventually decided to translate Western political, social and economic works into Chinese. His translation of Thomas Huxley's Evolution and Ethics was published in 1898; Adam Smith’s The Wealth of the Nations in 1901; John Stuart Mills On Liberty in 1903; Herbert Spencer's The Study of Sociology in 1903; Edward Jenks's A History of Politics in 1904; and Montesquiew’s The Five years after 's Exhortation to Study, Yan's translation of Mill's On Liberty was published in 1903, although he started ‘mentions two basic meanings of liberty or freedom: Republican beginnings 143 ‘© being without restraint or interference; being the opposite of ‘slavery (nu li), subj shu), necessity (bi x1)’ (Yan and Wang 1986: chen fi), bondage (yue ‘The example he gives for freedom as non-interference is an English phrase: ‘set the dog at liberty.’ Unfortunately, here Yan does not give further articu- of liberty as non-slavery or non-subjection. As we shall see, to get @ better sense of what Yan's view on liberty really was, we have to look at his other writings? ‘Two years later, in 1905, Yan was invited to give a series of lectures on Politics to a group of young people in Shanghai. Every Friday for eight weeks Yan gave a lecture on politics. The interest in politics among young people, and the invitation of Yan to give lectures on politic, was inspired by the Qing Court’ official announcement made earlier in that year that the court was ‘preparing for constitutionalism’ (Luo et al. 2004: ions of liberty. ‘Yan used ‘liberty in politics’ or ‘political liberty’ to refer to liberty as non- interference, emphasizing that one must carefully sh this conception from other conceptions of liberty. First, ‘political libert tinguished from “individual freedom in ethics’ or ‘an individ relation to society’, or ‘ethical freedom’ (Yan and Wang 1986: ‘made the distinction, Yan makes the following remark: ‘The meaning of political liberty is different from the meaning of individual freedom in ethics Several years ago I translated Mill's book On the Boundaries between Self and Society [On Liberty]. This book is * about an individual's freedom in relation to society, and it is not about political liberty. Political liberty is the opposite of restraints, What we talk about in politics is a group of people, restrained by the govern ment. When the restraints are excessive, it will give birth to the rebel- lious liberalism." [Being restrained by the government is different from] what is referred to in Mill's book, which is [an] individual's words and actions being kidnapped by the public opinions and forces in the society (Yan and Wang 1986: 1282) In other words, Yan's ‘political literty’ and ‘ethical freedom’ are really what we now, following Isaiah Berlin, would call ‘negative liberty’ and ‘positive liberty’, respectively. iteresting about Yan's political thought in addition to these two conceptions, there is a third This is how he articulates it:144 Yang Xiao In Greek and Latin, ‘liberty’ is the opposite of ‘slave’. For during that time [of ancient Greece and Rome] people have different status. Those ‘who have the status of first-class citizens are called ‘free people’, and those who do not are called ‘slaves’ ... ‘Liberty’ used in this way is not a political term, but a legal term. Why is this the case? This is because lib- ¢ expresses a relation not between the citizen and the ‘between people, some having and some not having the status of citizenship. (Wan and Wang 1986: 1282) Yan's third conception of liberty, then, refers to the status of an individual, from the domination of arbitrary power. If one lives in a despotic monarchy, one is not free because one is not free from the domination of the arbitrary will of the tyrant. Liberty as non-domination is different from liberty as non interference, namely, whether a government interferes in the individuals life, This is wiry Yan emphasizes that it is possible that a government is tyrannical and cruel, but it may interfere rarely (Yan and Wang 1986: 1283) possible that the government is benevolent. and kind, but the people are not fre in the sense that they are slaves under the rule of a benevolent government (bid: 1283). To show further the difference between ordinary free people and slaves, Yan first starts with the following observation: For ordinary people like us, we cannot be without being restrained, But ‘when we are restrained it is often due to a law, or a contract, or a pro- mise. A promise is an unwritten contract. To take an example at have promised to come here to give lectures on politics on Fric ight weeks, After I have made that promise, I do not have free to come on Fridays For civilized people take keeping promises seriously. t (Yan and Wang 1986: 1284)- He then contrasts it with what itis like to be a slave: These are all examples of being restrained [in the case of free people). However, it is completely different in the case of a slave, A slave free in his life; he must always follow the master’s orders, whic! ‘ost pitiful. Now suppose a government has the following features: it does whatever it wants to the people, and the people must follow its orders regarding their labor, their properties, their wife and children, and how they spend their time. They have no laws to rely on to fight against the government except through rebellion and revolution. Such a government Republican beginnings 145 is dominating, and its people have no liberty; they are slaves ... To establish the constitution is to establish a law on which we may rely to fight against the king someday. Without such a I no constitutionalism. Whether the king is benevolent or relevant. (Wan and Wang 1986: 1284)2+ This third conception of liberty as the opposite of slavery was a buzzword around the tum of the 20th century among the republicanists. This is the same as Pettit’s republican conception of liberty as the opposite of slavery: This opposition between slavery or servitude on the one hand and free- dom on the other is probably the single most characteristic feature of the Jong thetoric of liberty to which the experience of the Roman republic ‘gave rise (Patterson. 199) ignificant, because slavery is essentially characterized by domination, not by actual intesference: even if the slave's master proves to be entirely benign and permissive, he ot she continues to dominate the slave, Contrasting liberty with slavery is a sure sign, of taking liberty to consist in non-domination rather than in non-interference. Pettit 1997: 32) ‘We now tum to a revealing remark Yan makes in his ‘Note on Translation? for his translation of Mills On Liberty in 1903: In a regime ruled by aristocrats people will be struggling to get freedom from {the domination of] the aristocrats; in a regime of despotism, people Will be struggling to get freedom from [tke domination of} the king. However, in a constitutional republic, what people will be struggling to get freedom from is neither aristocrats nor the king. In a constitutional republic, both the aristocrats and the king are restrained by the rule of Jaw at the same time, Therefore neither of them can abuse their power. Therefore what people will be struggling to get freedom from will be society, groups, and customs, (Yang and Wang 1986: 134) ‘Yan then says that Mill’s book On Liberty was written for the English people ‘who live in a constitutional democracy, and this is way Mill puts his emphasis on ‘freedom from society’ or the “boundaries between self and society’ (Yang and Wang 1986: ‘Yan here clearly implies that this is also the reason ‘why Mill's emphasis is not on liberty as non-domination, because the English, living in a co nal democracy, are ‘free’ in that sense. So here we can see the benefit of taking into account Yan's other writings ~ we now see that Yan's cpressed in his translation of Mill is only part of his views on liberty. It is not surprising that one may get the impression that Yan is a146 Yang Xiao liberal if one focuses on his translation of Mill. What was remarkable is that ‘Yan himself was aware of the liberal conception of liberty in Mill and the republican conception of liberty he was talking about in Lectures on Politics. This is a key passage from the latter: In the West, when one asks whether the people in a country are free or not, its real meaning is to ask whether this country has upper and lower parliaments. (Yang and Wang 1986: 1284) Itis unfortunate that even though there is @ large body of secondary literature in both English and Chinese on Yan Fu and his political thought, no one iscusses Yan Fu as a republicanist. He has been characterized as a nondiberal and nationalist (Benjamin Schwartz), a liberal (Kown Huang), or a commu- nitarian (Wang Hui), to mention some well-known interpretations, but never lars tend to focus on Yan's translation of Mill’s On Liberty. The second is that scholars tend to take for granted the ‘negative-positive liberty’ framework (as in Huang’s case), or the ‘liberal versus communitarian’ framework (as in ‘Wang Huis case), neither of which leaves room for the third republican conception of liberty. 3 We now look at some popular joumals to show that Yan is not an isolated case. Some of the people I mention in this section might not have been influ- enced by Yan. It seemed that it is more likely that the republican conception of liberty was something in the air at the time. ‘When Yan gave his lectures on politics in 1905, the republican conception of liberty as non-slavery had already been a buzzword in popular print media paper run by the constitutional monarchists in exile in ‘Ou Jujia (1870-1911), took for granted that the opposite of being fee is to be a slave: ‘When Westemers speak of China, they say that the Chinese are not self independent and are slaves ... I have reflected on this To say that China is a country of slaves is absolutely true. Why? All human beings have sovereignty, and are not to be dominated by others. If one is dominated by others, then one must listen to the commands from others in all aspects of one’s life ... One is dependent on others as one’s masters.” Republican beginnings 147 In this samtic newspaper, there were two articles published around the same time, both of which were entitled ‘Of Slaves’. The first stated: Slaves are the opposite of citizens, and ‘slave’ is a condemning label for a ‘human being. Citizens are those who have power for self-governing and dispositions for independence, and have the public right to participate in polities ... Slaves are those who have no power for self-governing, nor heart for independence. In every aspect of slaves’ lives, they have to obey their masters?” The article also mentions that Montesquieu has said that the people in des- potic countries have the habits of slaves, and that since the Qin and Han politcal rhetoric, but bad history. The other article reiter ints; it spoke of how George Washington did not want to be ‘a slave of the British’ and eventually led the American people to found a republic We can find the same ideas in the newspapers run by the revolutionary party in exile in Japan as well. The following passage is from a 1901 article tiled ‘On Citizens’, published in Guonsin bao (Citizens): ‘What is freedom? Roughly speaking, one is said to be ‘free’ when one is ated. There are two ways in which one can be dominated: the be dominated by a monarchical power, and the second is by a ower. France became free when it was liberated fom the dom- ination of the monarchical power, and America became free when it was liberated from the domination of the foreign power [Britain]. Therefore, those who are dominated by a monarchical power and cannot do what the French people have done are not ‘citizens’. Those who are dominated by foreign powers and cannot do what American people have done are not ‘citizens’.?° The anonymous author also reiterated the liberty as non-dominatioa point we have seen in the other articles: ‘Slaves are willing to be dominated, whereas citizens love liberty’ Furthermore, what defines and differentiates a citizen from a slave is not just their attitude towards liberty or domination; itis the power relations that define the status of citizens and slaves: ‘A slave is some- one whose pleasure and fear are all dependent on others’ likes and dislikes"? In other words, liberty isa feature of @ power relationship, and being a slave fsa status. Jn another newspaper artic ves published in 1903 in another revo- lutionary party’s newspaper, it reiterated the liberty as non-domination point again: ‘Slaves are the opp. itizens It also explicitly provoked the Roman concept of liberty: ‘The Roman laws regarded slaves as beasts’ It148 Yang Xiao claimas that the history of China is a 3,000-year history of slavery and that people are not free because the dictators treated them as if they were ‘cows and horses’. 4 Around the tum of the 20th century, there were already some anti-republicanists Who tried to dismiss the republican idea of liberty as non-domination by claiming that it was ‘fore 3t Chinese” and ‘anti-Confuciaa’ 2° ‘We can still find people making this kind of claim today, for example, among those who promote ‘political Confucianism’, such as Jiang Qing (Jiang et al 2012). Is liberty as non-domination 2 ‘Western’ or ‘Roman’ value, not @ ‘Chinese’ value?” “How one may answer this question obviously depends on how one under- stands the term ‘Chinese value’ and how one understands ‘Chineseness’ ‘There are basically two ways to define it. The frst is to take ‘Chinese values’ as exclusively consisting in the values that can be found in traditional Chinese culture. There are at least two problems with this approach. First, Chinese calture is large and contains multitudes. For example, both Daoism and Con- fucianism are part of Chinese culture, but they endorse different and conflict- ing values. Which ones should we choose as genuinely ‘Chinese’ values? Second, China has a long history, and has absorbed a lot of ‘foreign’ cultures, especially after the Han Dynasty (206 nce-220). Where should one draw the line, before which one finds the authentic Chinese values and after which one only gets hybrid and impure ‘Chinese’ values? Most contemporary cultural nationalists in China today tend to define ‘traditional Chinese culture’ as consisting exclusively in the ‘original Confucianism’, articulated by Con- fucius, For example, Jiang Qing and some other contemporary Confucians do not even take classical Daoism to be part of true ‘Chinese values. mention Chinese Buddhism, which was introduced from India in r ‘Westen Han Dynasty and had already become an essential part of the fabric of Chinese people’s life by the Tang Dynasty. So perhaps even the Tang Dynasty should not be where the line ought to be drawn? However, in contrast to this first definition, there could be a second way to define ‘Chinese values’, which would take Chinese culture as a living tradi- tion, and would also try to liberate us from what may be called the ‘tyranny of the original’. According to this second way of defining Chinese values, Chinese Buddhism may count as having become a genuine part of Chinese culture, even though it was originally a foreign culture from India. In fact, (fu hui fa) “Fu hu is really a far-fetched interpretation of a foreign concept, Republican beginnings 149 Which reduces and distorts it into a familiar native idea. It must be pointed out that the term ‘fv hi (projection) did not have the kind of negative con- notation it has today. In fac, the method of fu hu was sometimes justified by the ‘fact’ that Buddhism had originated from China. Some Chinese Buddhists genuinely believed that Laozi, the founder of Daoism, went to India and founded Buddhism, and heace all the Buddhist ideas could be found in Daoism. However, Chinese Buddhists eventually abandoned the method of fic ‘iui, and the later translations were much more accurate and faithful. They also came to realize that Buddhism was different from Daoism, and could not have been founded by Laozi. We can find a similar pattern in the history of Western ideas in China. For nese culture. Having surveyed the writings of about 300 Chinese authors who discussed reform from 1840 to 1911, the historian Wang Ermin concludes ‘that almost all of them try to show that Wester learning has originally come from China, or been anticipated by ancient Chinese. This is the so-called ‘xi ue zhong yuan shuo? (the doctrine that Wester learning originated from China). For example, many of them insist that the parliamentary system already existed in ancient China.** We find exactly such a thesis in Liang ichao's 1896 essay “Gu yi yuan kao’ (Verifying the Exi ment in Ancient China), published in Shivu bao and Liang’s simple and rather simplistic argument on the literal meaning of ‘yi yuan’, the Chinese term for ‘parliament. Since ‘yf’ means ‘discussion’, ‘yuan’ means ‘chamber’, the literal meaning of ‘yi juan’ (yi yuan), namely parliament, in ancient China, ‘Yan Fu wrote a letter to Liang. Yan's letter has attempt of projecting Chinese ideas onto Western ics (Yan and Wang 1986: 931), He might o: have also said Liang did was ‘fie hu? (projection, far-fetched and distorted inter- »m Buddhism to refer to another similar fe, following Yan, Liang would come to ‘worst intellectual mistake caused by the worst kind of Liang could also have changed his mind about the method of fi hui by recognizing how much damage Zhang Zhidong was able to do to the reform agenda by using the same fu hui method. Zhang has the following to say about min quan (people's sovereignty) and yi yuan (the parliament) in Exhortation to Study:150 Yang Xiao ‘An investigation of the origin of the doctrine of min quan (people's sovereignty) in foreign countries reveals that min quan simply means that f state should have @ discussion chamber (yi yuan) where folks can opinions and communicate their group feelings It is to express their feelings, not to wield their sovereignty. hanged its meaning, calling it ‘min quan’ (people's (Zang et al. 1998: 9722) Titeral meaning of yi yuan (discussion chamber). Since Zhang wrote this only three years after Liang's essay on.yi yuan, which in the newspaper Shivu bao, of which Zhang’ was the main possible that Zhang had acquired this (mis)understanding of to deal with the conception of liberty (zi you) ‘0 turn this new and radical idea into something traditional and much le I: In foreign countries today there is the ‘zi you dang’ (liberal party). The ‘Westem word actually sounds like l-bo-er-t [lil fine if we translate ‘liberal party’ as ‘gong lun dang’ (public discussion party), but itis wrong to translate it as ‘x! you’ (free). (Zhang 198: 9723) The most crucial point here is that this does not necessarily mean that lib- exty as non-domination cannot become a ‘Chinese’ value. One would draw such a conclusion only when one adopts the first way of defining Chinese values. However, if one adopts the second way of defining Chinese values, one should conclude that, like Chinese Buddhism, Chinese republicanism has become an integrated part of a living tradition, although, compared with Chinese Buddhism, its 100-year history is relatively shorter. By taking seriously the fact that the republican concept of liberty as non- domination already has bad a history in China, one may sidestep the question of whether the concept is ‘Wester’ or ‘Chinese’. If one indeed takes that history seriously, one should then ask different questions. For example, one should ask: Why did the republican idea of liberty as the opposite of slavery or domination spread like wildfire in China? Which nerve did it touch? Why did it speak to the Chinese or why did it ring true to them around the turn of the 20th century? Republican beginnings 151 To take just one example, the 1901 article ‘On Citizens’, which. we dis- cussed earlier. We now may notice that the author's understanding of dom- ination and oppression is based on his or her experience of a master-slave power relationship, knowledge of slavery as a legal institution, the experience Of the Chinese Coolies, as well as men’s domination over women: When those who rule become masters then those who are ruled become slaves. When aristocrats become masters then common people ‘become slaves. When free people become masters then unfree people become slaves, When men become masters then women become slaves. When this is the case, we cal ita state of slaves. The opposite is true of the citizens [A state of citizens] transcends the boundary between the ruling and the ruled; hence everyone is a ruler and is ruled at the same time. It trans- cends the boundary between aristocrats and common people; hence everyone is a king and a servant at the same time. It transcends the boundary between free and unfree people; hence there are no laws that sanction slavery, and no foreign workers that are like the Chinese Coolies. It transcends the boundary between men and women; hence not only men bbut also women have the right to participate in governing.*© ‘The discrimination against the Chinese Coolies in America was widely reported in print media at the time It is very likely that the author was referring to the American laws that sanction slavery. The Chinese translation of Uncle Tom's Cabin was published in 1901, and immediately became a bestseller. It apparently struck a nerve, Why? In a 1904 newspaper article “Reading Uncle Tom's Cabin’, the author says that the translators were ‘weeping while they translated the book, and it was not only because they felt sad about the suffering of the black slaves but also because they felt sad that Chinese people were becoming well? The author also says, I read Uncle Tom's Cabin, using the tears I cried for the black people to ery for the yellow people, using the black people’s past to cry for the yellow people's id the author identify with the black slaves in America? t certain that the author identified with black slaves because he or she was thinking that China would soon become an unfree country, domi- nated by foreign powers. The author must have thought about a series of defeats China had experienced, such as the defeat against the British in 1842, against the French in 1984-85, and against the Japanese in 1895, The same can be said of Yan Fu. We mentioned earlier Navy Yard Schoo! to study English and navigation in 1867-71. The school is was established to train young people for the Fuzhou dockyard. Yan was obviously aware that when China and France engaged in a war over Vietnam in 1884-85 the French destroyed the warships built at the Fuzhou dockyard within an hour. Yan also had friends and relatives wo died in the war. So it seems that it was based on their genuine experience and under- standing of people who were being dominated, as well as their own genuine182 Yang Xiao fear and anxiety of China being and becoming dominated by foreign powers that the Chinese intellectuals understood the conception of liberty as non- domination, and why this foreign’ conception spoke to them so com This is why even when we read their writings today we rarely have the fe that they were faking it. On the contrary we feel that it makes sense that they were attracted by the conception of liberty as non-domination, appropriating it as their own conception. In a history of liberty in modem China - a larger project, of which this chapter is a part - I show that we can make the best sense of modem Chinese history in terms of liberty as non-domination. The desire and passion for liberty in this republican sense has been one of the driving forces in modern Chinese history. It seems that this is the ultimate justification of the Chinese republican tradition. Acknowledgement I am grateful to the editors of this volume, Jun-Hyeok Kwak and Leigh Jenco, for inviting me to be part of an important and exciting project. I thank Leigh Jenco for her extremely helpful written comments on an early version ‘of my paper. Notes 1 [tis a large body of literature, thus itis impossible to ist all the important works or ‘xian zheng’ MEEK, one finds thousands of articles and books in Chinese. One ‘would also Team that people have been debating this issue passionately, and the vahue, However, if one Googles the English ost nothing comes up except an essay T wrote ‘modem nation-states, a republic is an ‘imagined community’ (to borrow a from Beuedit Andenon), which wou hie bee imposible ina vast county dition to help us solve political problems China is facing today. There, I focused on Michael Walzer’s theory of non-domination and Hannah Arends ‘Athenian’ Republican beginnings 153 version of republicanism. In Xiao 2002, I discuss Liang Qichao’s ‘ ‘epublicanian, focusing on his emphasis onthe cve-vstuo-basod cone acterized as a ‘Roman’ version of rept marily not in terms of 10 huang dang), and some are Kang Youvei (1858-1927) and Liang (18541921) a8 a Reformer, even though he to be an official member of Kang Youwei’s yunted as a Reformer, al monarchist party to be ok, many more important Bellamy 2007; Laborde 2 to these monographs, more 2 as well, such as Weinstock of Hobbes in 2005, Liber bbes and the Republican Liberty ia 2011; Norberto 's The Idea of the Republic in 2009; Cass Sunstein’ Partial tution in 2005; Philip Petti’s Republicanism in 2003; and Gordon Wood's lim of the American Revolution in 1997. Some of these are included in edited by Ying Qj called the ‘Republicanism Translation Series’. Ying Qi Gongmin gonghe spt hich is colecton of taslations of inportant atl by Vio, Soot, Miteinan, Sandel aod Teyor 10 Mom of Anais were and Get wos tre tee tease? acini Disnurses vas tandated tn 2 The Common Wealth of slated in 1963 and repented im 1981; The Federal Paper lial wang a 182 and Tooquele® Democracy dmorca yin yuan zhuan (Marriage hapter 88 of the 17th-century novel Xin Destinies to Awaken the World). :184 Yang Xiao 12 In fact, the Emperor book see Zhang : French and the English ‘Recorder, respectively. The English translation was published as @ book three years later, Zhang and Woodbridge 1901. The French translation was also published as a ‘book in 1909. usually use “benevolent governance” to translate ren zheng when it is used in i its modern sense, I use “benevolent century, which was the time when script, which served as a preface to the idge's English translation with modifications (Zhang and Woodbridge idge's translation is ‘enjoy a perfect freedom and a happy life’ (Zhang aad bridge 1901: 41). ‘more detailed account of Yan's lit and his study in England, soe Huang 2008 tarted the translation around 1899, See Luo 2004: 124 Here Yan refers to the terms in both Chinese and English, One of the reasons why Kowu Huang does not discuss Yan's republicans concept ‘The phenomenon we study government. Government is 2 int or compulsion exercised by means of punishment. This power ‘Ponsrat may in certain circumstances be oppressive; in opposition to it oer is set up, Thus in political science the tyranny to which liberty is opposed must reside in the government. If at the same time there exists another sort of tyranny, Which is exercised not by the government but by public opinion, this fact Geciey 1896: 25 This passage is lrgoly based on Secley 1896: 109-10. 44 Liang Qichao has made a similar point regarding the constitution, See Xiao 2002: 2-30, lation ‘On the Meaning of Liberty’ to ‘On Society", 26 Liang 1986, vol. 1: 49. The newspaper was founded (lebze Both Ling end Ou Juja yee Kang Youve stadety and core members intionary 1915), one of Kang’s "Gams bao (Citizen), vol 2, 1901. Reprinted in Zhang eta. 1963, vol. Il: 73. The article is not signed. Republican beginnings 155 39 I tis comet, seams that Petite strategy of using Sen's capbiltics as an analogy to show that liberty as non- fre ey it not have Sorted in Zhang’s and Yaris tine For the iden of cpactes sos fe be ch lai se than Hberty ab no-dominaton. Peat sco Petts chap at Angle, Stephen C. (2012) Contemporary Confuctan Political Philosophy: Toward Progressive Confucianism. Cambridge: Polity, (Bell Dass. 2008) China's New Conactanions Poliics and Everday Life n a hanging Soe, Pincston, NK Princeton Universty Pres (2007) Poitiea? Contiutonalon A. Republican Defence of the Consicionality of Democracy. Casidge: Cambridge Unversy Press, Chan, Joseph Cho Wai 2013) Confcan Prfeconlom’ A Poical Posophy for “Mode Times. Toe Pinceton-Caina Seen, Cheng, Zhonsyng and Nicholas Buin, 2002) Contemporary Chinese Phas Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. a me Cone, Pal A. (1988) Discovering History n Cina: American Historical Writ on the Recent Ce Pat Sif ast Aan nse New Wor: Colaba Fnversty Press. Coliagwoed, F.C. (2005) [1933] An say on Phosophical Metiod. Re. ed. Oxford and New York Claredon Pres and Oxford University Press. Fang Ruping, Q010) Reconarutonse Cnfclani Rethinking Moray efter the Wer. Palsopbical Stier in Contemporary Cultus. Dovdrett and Londow Springe: Honchan, sel, 2002) Cie Republican. The Problems of Pilosopty, London and New York: Ros Hummg, Kowa. (2008) The Meaning of Freedom: Yon Fu and the Origins of Chinese berlin. Hong Kong: Chinese Univers PreseKang, Xizoguang. (2004) ‘Reuzbeng: Quanwei [Benevolent Government: The Theory of Zhanlue yu guanit [Strategy ad Manageme 7. 2005) Benevolent Government (Ren Zheng): The Third Path of China's Political ‘Development. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co, Ltd Laborde, Cécile (2008) Critical Republicanism: The Hijab Controversy and Political Philosophy. Oxford Political Theory. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press Laborde, Cézile and John W. Maynor. (2008) Republicaniem and Political Theory ‘of Authoritarian States) Qing Yi Bao Quan Bian 1898-1901. Taibei, Taiwan: Lovett, Frank A General Theory of Domination and Justice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Luo, Yaojiu etal. 2004) Yan Fu Nion Pu Xin Bian. Di 1 ban. ed. 1 vols Xiamen: Lu fiang chu ban she. (Qi, Xoemin. (2004) “Yan Fu Zhengzhi Jiangyi Wenben Suoyuan’ [The Source of Yan Fu’s Lectures on Politics). Lishi yanjt [The Study of History] 2 Richardson, Henry S. 2002) Democratic Autonomy: Public Reasoning Ab ‘of Policy: Oxford Political Theory. New York: Oxford University Press. Ends ‘Seeley. London and New York: Macmillan and Co. 1. (2012) ‘On Non-Domination.” University of Toronto Law Journal 62(3): The Hlight of the Lapwing. A Naval ‘outings in China, Formasa and Japan. London: Longmans, Green and Co, ‘Teng, Sswyu and John King Fairbank. (1970) China's Response to the West: A ‘Documentary Survey, 1839-1923. College edn. New York: Atheneum. ‘Wang, Ermin. (1969) ng Zheng Zhi SI Xiang Shi Lun, Taibei Shi: Chu ban jian fa xing ren. Wang Ermin: Xue sheng shu ju zong jing xiao. ‘Weinstock, Daniel M, and Christian Nadeau. (2004) Republicanism: History, Theory ‘and Practice. London: Frank Cass. ‘Xiao, Yang, (2002) ‘Liang Qichao's Social and Political Philosophy.” In Chung-Ying Cheng aad Nicholas Bunnin (eds) Contemporary Chinese Philosophy. Oxford: 6. — scovering Republicanism in China: Beyond the Debate between New ‘and Liberals” Contemporary Chinese Thought 34(3): 18-34. ‘Yan, Fu and Shi Wang ‘Wa Wen Ji Cong Shu. suo fa xing. ‘Fi Ji, Di | ban, ed. 5 vols. Zhongguo Jin Dai Ren ‘Zhonghua shu ju: Xin bua shu dian, Beijing fa xing Republican beginnings 157 Yan, Xuetong, Daniel Bell, Zhe Sum and Edmund Ryden. (2011) Ancient Chinese Thought, Modem Chinese Power. The Princeton-China Series. Princeton, Ni Princeton University Press Znang, Nan et al (ed) (1963) Xinhai Geming Qianshi Nian Jian Shi Laer Xuanjt (A Selection of Essays on Politics from the Ten-Year Period before the 1911 Revolution) Beijing: Sanlian shudian, Zoang, Zhidong and Semuel 1. Woodbridge (trans). China’s Only Hope: An Appeal by her Greatest Viceroy, Chang Chi ith the Sanction ofthe Present Emperor. Edinburgh and London: Oliphant, Anderson & Zhang, Zhidong, Huafeng Sun, Shuyi Yuan and Bingxi Quan Ji [The Collected Works of Zhang Zhidong| Shijiachuang Shi: Hebei ren min chu ban she. ) Zhang Zhidong ban. ed, 12 vols