Jeffrey Wasserstrom

He doesn't like the idea of people on the streets in anything that can't be controlled. So there are a lot of ways that they're similar, a lot of ways they're different. They're also different, and this fits with this orderliness, that Xi Jinping talks positively about Confucius and Confucian traditions in China.

And Confucian traditions are based on kind of stable hierarchies for the most part and sort of clear categories of superior and inferior, whereas Mao liked things to be turned upside down. He thought of Confucianism as a futile way of thought that it held China back.

And Confucian traditions are based on kind of stable hierarchies for the most part and sort of clear categories of superior and inferior, whereas Mao liked things to be turned upside down. He thought of Confucianism as a futile way of thought that it held China back.

And Confucian traditions are based on kind of stable hierarchies for the most part and sort of clear categories of superior and inferior, whereas Mao liked things to be turned upside down. He thought of Confucianism as a futile way of thought that it held China back.

So you can come up with things that they're similar and you can come up with things where they're really opposites, but they both clearly did want to see China under rule by the Communist Party. And that's been a continuity and that connects them to the leaders in between them too as well.

So you can come up with things that they're similar and you can come up with things where they're really opposites, but they both clearly did want to see China under rule by the Communist Party. And that's been a continuity and that connects them to the leaders in between them too as well.

So you can come up with things that they're similar and you can come up with things where they're really opposites, but they both clearly did want to see China under rule by the Communist Party. And that's been a continuity and that connects them to the leaders in between them too as well.

First of all, we don't know that much about the historic Confucius. He's around the same time as figures like Socrates. And like with Socrates, we get a lot of what we know about him or think we know about him from what his followers said and things that were attributed to him and dialogues that were written afterwards. So

First of all, we don't know that much about the historic Confucius. He's around the same time as figures like Socrates. And like with Socrates, we get a lot of what we know about him or think we know about him from what his followers said and things that were attributed to him and dialogues that were written afterwards. So

First of all, we don't know that much about the historic Confucius. He's around the same time as figures like Socrates. And like with Socrates, we get a lot of what we know about him or think we know about him from what his followers said and things that were attributed to him and dialogues that were written afterwards. So

You can have a lot of fun with these sort of axial age thinkers and what they had in common. Another thing that connects these axial age thinkers is they were trying to kind of make a case for why they should be able to educate the next generation of the elite and sort of had a way of promising that they had philosophical ideas that helped decide how you should run a polity.

You can have a lot of fun with these sort of axial age thinkers and what they had in common. Another thing that connects these axial age thinkers is they were trying to kind of make a case for why they should be able to educate the next generation of the elite and sort of had a way of promising that they had philosophical ideas that helped decide how you should run a polity.

You can have a lot of fun with these sort of axial age thinkers and what they had in common. Another thing that connects these axial age thinkers is they were trying to kind of make a case for why they should be able to educate the next generation of the elite and sort of had a way of promising that they had philosophical ideas that helped decide how you should run a polity.

Confucius lived in a time when there were these warring kingdoms in a territory that later became China. But what he said was that there had been this period of great order in the past. that the lines between inferior and superior were clear, and there was a kind of synergy between superior and inferior that kept everything ticking along really nicely.

Confucius lived in a time when there were these warring kingdoms in a territory that later became China. But what he said was that there had been this period of great order in the past. that the lines between inferior and superior were clear, and there was a kind of synergy between superior and inferior that kept everything ticking along really nicely.

Confucius lived in a time when there were these warring kingdoms in a territory that later became China. But what he said was that there had been this period of great order in the past. that the lines between inferior and superior were clear, and there was a kind of synergy between superior and inferior that kept everything ticking along really nicely.

He thought that hierarchical relationships were a good thing, and that the trick was that both sides in a hierarchical relationship owed something to the other. So the father and son relationship was a key one. The father... deserved respect from the son, but owed the son care and benevolence. And things would be fine as long as both sides in a relationship held up their end.

He thought that hierarchical relationships were a good thing, and that the trick was that both sides in a hierarchical relationship owed something to the other. So the father and son relationship was a key one. The father... deserved respect from the son, but owed the son care and benevolence. And things would be fine as long as both sides in a relationship held up their end.

He thought that hierarchical relationships were a good thing, and that the trick was that both sides in a hierarchical relationship owed something to the other. So the father and son relationship was a key one. The father... deserved respect from the son, but owed the son care and benevolence. And things would be fine as long as both sides in a relationship held up their end.

And he had a whole series of these relationships. The husband to the wife was, again, an unequal one of the husband being superior to the wife, but him owing the wife care and her owing him deference. And he had the same notion that then the emperor to the ministers, these were all parallels.