A Plutocrat, a Fascist, & a Lout walk into a bar

[The following parable is brought to you by the letters ‘P’ (plutocrat), ‘F’ (fascist), and ‘L’ (lout)]

P: Listen F, I hear you’re going big on your scapegoat-bashing campaign to win the upcoming election. I have plenty of money to help you if you’re willing to help me.

F: What would you like, Mr. P? Let me guess – tax cuts for the likes of you; cutting regulations that get in the way of you doing whatever you want; cutting benefits and public services for the poor so there’s more money to subsidise your companies; and crackdowns on anyone making a nuisance of themselves protesting against your business activities. Is that about right?

P: You’ve got the gist of it. You commit yourself to that, I’ll pay you whatever you need to win power, and stay in power.

F: Don’t worry, Mr. P, your donations will be nothing compared with the extra money that will be coming back in your direction. But excuse me for one second, L, another pint, mate?

L: Thought you’d never ask. And a packet of crisps. Is this going to take much longer? I’ve got a protest to go to, throw a few bricks, that sort of thing. I don’t want to be late.

F: We’re nearly done. Here, have another pint, then you can go join your mates.

L: Cheers! I’ve been looking forward to it all week. We might outnumber the coppers this time. 

P: F, he’s not going to that protest against one of my fossil fuel subsidiaries, is he? I heard that was happening today.

F: No, of course not. He hates any pro-environment initiative, detests ‘Net Zero’ – I told him to, not that [in a whisper] he has a clue what that is. No, he’s going to a protest against there being too many immigrants in our country. 

P: You mean illegal immigrants?

F: No, immigrants, they hate immigrants, full stop. Love blaming them for everything. Thrive on telling them to go home.

P: My father migrated here, and this is his home.

F: Take it easy, Mr. P. My wife’s an immigrant too. L and his mates have a go at the people we encourage them to have a go at. But they know better than to upset anyone I don’t want them to upset.

P: You’re confident of that? L and his kind are not going to get out of hand? I’m not just talking about immigrants. When we get the chance to cut their healthcare, completely ruin public transport, make it even more difficult for them to get a half decent place to live in, and take away what protection is left for workers, they won’t like it. They’re a volatile bunch and could turn on us.

F: You need not worry, Mr. P. They listen to me. The more upset they get, the more we wind them up to hate migrant workers, refugees, benefit claimants, people with disability, feminists, environmentalists, socialists – there are plenty of scapegoats in the sea. But whatever happens, they won’t bother you. I’ll make sure you’re known as one of the good guys – Christian, patriot, entrepreneur. Practically a saint.

P: To be honest, I’m a bit nervous about all this ‘God and Country’ stuff you throw around. I don’t go to church. I can’t stand any talk of Christian compassion for the poor. One of my companies sells arms to countries not exactly friendly to ours. Another one channels profits to offshore accounts with foreign partners. And the way your people rant about banning abortion even in case of rape, that’s just over the top. I wouldn’t put up with it if, heaven forbid, it should happen to my daughter.

F: Relax. What you do or won’t do – that’s your business. No one is going to know about it. Anyone dares report anything untoward about you, we dismiss it as ‘fake news’. Your public image is that of a great supporter of our magnificent cause – Faith, Flag & Family Values. 

L: Right, I’m off. Going to tell those [expletive], [expletive], [expletive], to go [expletive], [expletive]. It’s going to be a [expletives] good day. See you, gents.

P: Wouldn’t want to come across a fellow like him in a dark alley.

F: Come now, Mr. P, we need people like L to build up a movement of hate and anger, to push public support towards politicians like me who will then win the power to get even more money flowing into your coffers. Make your donation to us, and rest assured it’ll be the beginning of a beautiful partnership.

Learning from Mozi: the first communitarian

Confucius’ teachings on loyalty, family, and customs have been regarded by many as instructive for securing strong community life. However, it is the critical appraisal of Confucian ideas by the outstanding thinker, Mozi, that offers us the most important communitarian lessons in social and political action.

Mozi was born soon after Confucius’ death, and became one of the most influential teachers in China during the fifth century BC [Note 1]. Like Confucius, he was greatly concerned with society falling apart through people acting disrespectfully an aggressively against others. For Confucius, the root cause of the problem was that people were not following the customary roles and rites that had been laid down. He famously urged everyone to remember that children should obey their parents, wives should obey their husbands, subordinates should obey their superiors, and subjects should obey their rulers. In return, parents, husbands, those with superior ranks and status, and rulers, should look after those who submit to them. For Mozi, Confucian obedience is all one-way and if one is not well treated in return, one is still expected to submit. This blind trust in the wisdom and kindness of those with customary power is simply not acceptable.

What Mozi calls for instead is 兼愛 – often translated as ‘universal love’ but more aptly rendered as ‘mutual concern’. If we are mindful of the wellbeing of others, but others are not concerned about us, we could be at a disadvantage in life. If nobody cares about anyone else, the ensuing neglect and conflicts would be damaging for everyone. The only sensible approach is to require everyone to commit to being concerned with the wellbeing of everyone else. Obviously this does not mean that one should try to personally look after thousands, or even millions, of other people. What is needed is a combination of behavioural rules to avoid the inflicting of harm, and the setting up and supporting of institutional arrangements so that one will get help if one needs it AND so will others if they need help.

Power is to be accordingly vested in people not on the basis of customs, but on the basis of who can best demonstrate their reliability in setting up and overseeing these rules and institutions. Mozi was the first philosopher, not just in China but across the world, to set out a comprehensive framework for testing the acceptability of any proposal (regarding rules, institutions, policies, etc). This has three elements:

First of all, we have the test of past experience: What do records of previous events or initiatives tell us? Did people find all the old customs and practices as helpful as some traditionalists today are making out? What was the actual impact? What lessons were passed down?

Secondly, there is the test of current testimony: What happens when something is tried out? Do people find it working as well as its proponents have suggested, or have problems been uncovered? How does it compare with other options that are being tested?

Lastly, the test of future discovery: What new evidence may we encounter? Are there unforeseen effects that come to be noticed and reported? Do people beyond the initial few have similar experiences or have they been affected in different ways? Are there further consequences to emerge down the line?

Mozi was once challenged by a princeling who dismissed his views as too idealistic to share with the public. Mozi replied by pointing out that the princeling could (a) advocate the rejection of mutual concern, and become known as someone who cannot be trusted to reciprocate the concern of others; (b) also advocate mutual concern in public but indulge in self-centred practices, and have to spend his life avoid being found out as a detestable hypocrite; or (c) stay quiet, and be known as someone with nothing to say about moral matters. 

Mozi himself dedicated his life to teaching and practising the philosophy of mutual concern, to build communities sustained by solidarity and cooperation. Confucius has reputation on his side. But it is Mozi that we should all be learning from.

--

Note 1: Mozi - 墨子 in Chinese – (also transliterated as ‘Mo Tzu’ or ‘Mo Tze’) was thought to have lived around 470s-390s BC, with most current estimates opting for 470-391 BC, making him an exact contemporary of Socrates (470-391 BC).