my 2 cents:

Some people used to be crazy on Communism, now some others are crazy on
Democracy. Some people, including me, find that to read Confucius and Pound
is much more enjoyable.


Peter Bi


----- Original Message -----
From: A. David Moody <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 6:11 PM
Subject: i jen, one man (again)


>
> A useful analogy, and one which underlines the fact that the king in this
> chapter is not claiming to possess all power in his own right.  He has
just
> defeated the king of Hea who seems to have done just that--he
"extinguished
> his virtue and played the tyrant, extending his oppression over you, the
> people ..... [Heaven] sent down calamities on the House of Hea, to make
> manifest its crimes".  Legge's (con)version continues:
>     "Therefore, I, the little child, charged with the decree of Heaven and
> its
>     bright terrors ..... making clear announcement to the spiritual
> Sovereign
>     of the high heavens, requested leave to deal with the ruler of Hea as
a
>     criminal.  Then I sought for the great sage [his principal adviser],
> with
>     whom I might unite my strength, to request the favour of Heaven on
>     behalf of you, my multitudes.  High Heaven truly showed its favour to
>     the inferior people, and the criminal has been degraded and subjected.
>     Heaven's appointment is without error;--brilliantly now like the
> blossoming
>     of flowers and trees, the millions of the people show a true reviving.
>         III.  "It is given to me, the one man, to give harmony and
> tranquillity
>     to your States and Families; and now I know not whether I may offend
>     the powers above and below.... "
>
> --and so on, making himself explicitly subject to powers above his own.
>
> A properly careful reading of that book of the Chou King would not
represent
> it as justifying arbitrary one-man rule.  That would be a clear abuse of
its
> ethic.
>
> Later En Lin Wei writes that in canto 94
> > Pound's preference for autocratic rule leads him to praise Roman
emperors
> > such as VESPASIAN and ANTONINUS, whose names he capitalizes at
> > 94.639.  On the bottom of the page the large characters meaning "one
man"
> > appear again.  In this context, Pound  makes very clear his opposition
to
> > democracy and his disregard for anything  resembling a constitutional
> > restriction on the monarch.  Written in Greek,  not far below the names
> > of the two Roman emperors, and two lines above the Chinese characters,
> > Pound places the phrase, "by the gods."  Tracing the source, Terrell
notes
> > that the complete sentence, attributed to the Emperor  Antoninus is,
"For
> > myself, I care little about constitutions, seeing that my  life is
> governed
> > by the gods" (Terrell, p. 581, 94-125).  Pound underscores the sentiment
> > by following the Greek with the English "not particular about
theoretical
> > organizations" (94.639).  Terrell's gloss on the Chinese characters
which
> > appear on this page merit close attention, since it sheds light on an
> > essential problem confronting the reader who discovers the basic
identity
> > of the political philosophies of Pound, Mussolini, Antoninus and
> Confucius.
> >
> >                 Ideograms:  I1 Jen2  . . .  "one  man."  Antoninus
> >         said to Vespasian:  "For just as a single man pre-
> >         eminent in virtue transforms a democracy into the
> >         guise of a government of a single man who is the
> >         best; so the government of one man, if it provides
> >         all round for the welfare of the community, is
> >         popular government" . . .   The immediate reason for
> >         the phrase ["one man"] came from the visit to St.
> >         Elizabeth's of a Confucian scholar, Carson Chang.
> >         Pound said to him that 4 Confucians working
> >         together could save China.  Chang replied, "Four?
> >         One is enough."
> >                                 (Terrell, p. 581, 94-126).
> >
> > There is a great deal more evidence to show that Pound despised
democracy.
> [end quote]
>
> Again, careless misreading leads to serious misrepresentation.  It is not
> Antoninus but Apollonius of Tyana who says to Vespasian--
>     For myself I care little about constitutions, seeing that my life is
>     governed by the Gods; but I do not like to see the human flock
>     perish for want of a shepherd at once just and moderate.  For
>     just as a single man pre-eminent in virtue transforms a democracy
>     into the guise of a government of a single man who is the best; so
>     the government of one man , if it provides all round for the welfare
>     of the community, is popular goverment.
> There is nothing sinister in his not caring about constitutions.  As
> Terrell's gloss notes, "A[pollonius]'s page-long speech adds up to a lack
of
> interest in abstract theory."  The plain fact is that there is no
opposition
> to democracy here, nor is there in Pound's citation of Apollonius.  It
seems
> that he finds the chapter "worth attention" because in it the philosopher
is
> advising Vespasian on how, being an absolute ruler, he should conduct
> himself as one.
>
> En Lin Wei's problem seems to be that he cannot conceive that an emperor,
or
> king, or any kind of absolute ruler, might rule well.  He believes in
> elective democracy, and only in elective democracy.  Any alternative, it
> seems, must be anti-democratic and tyrannical.  He cannot accept that
under
> emperors, kings and even dictators, the burning question has not always
been
> how to overthrow a tyrant, but rather how to ensure that the ruler shall
> rule well--that is for the good of the people.  Democracies have the same
> problem with their elected representatives.  Pound's concern in the Cantos
> is not to favour one form of government over another, but to affirm the
idea
> that whatever the form of government it should serve the people as a
whole.
> So in the Chinese history cantos, given that China had an imperial system,
> he follows the discriminations of the Confucian historians between
> constructive emperors and disastrous ones. (Consider canto 53, very
> carefully.)  In the John Adams cantos, given a democratic system, he
follows
> Adams in his pursuit of the laws proper to an American democracy.  (To
seek
> to rectify democracy is to honour its principles, not to despise it.  To
put
> it the other way, to attack the abuses or the failings of a democracy is
not
> to attack democracy.)
>
> And as to "vain disputations", who needs them?   And the birds are singing
> in the rain outside my window.
>
> David Moody