andrewhong.net

Loss of mien-tzu is embarrasing – but loss of lien is catastrophic. When someone loses lien for immoral or socially disagreeable behaviour, society loses their trust in that person, and they are no longer able to function. And so catastrophic is the loss of lien that it can even lead to suicide!

Lien is important. And as a result, people will do anything to preserve their lien – they will even compound lie upon lie, they will even hurt others if it will only preserve their lien.

But underlying this belief that everyone starts off with good lien is the deep-seated notion in Chinese culture that people are essentially good…

The San Zi Jing (or Three Characters Classic) is a 13th century work used to teach children to read and write – and also infuse good Chinese behaviour. And the very first lines of the San Zi Jing teach this essential goodness of humans:

Men at their birth,
   are naturally good.
Their natures are much the same;
   their habits become widely different.
If foolishly there is no teaching,
   the nature will deteriorate.
The right way in teaching,
   is to attach the utmost importance
   in thoroughness.

San Zi Jing I.1.

It is this view of the human being that lies beneath the Chinese ascription of a good lien to everyone (read more about it in an earlier post). And it is only when people show their nature to have deteriorated, that their lien is subsequently discounted by society. Failing that however, society is ordered as though all people have a good lien – they are treated as though they will be upright and virtuous. Which is nice.

2. The false foundation of a good face

But this is important because it is the exact opposite to the Christan view of what humans are like. Consider how different the following passages are from the San Zi Jing:

The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Genesis 6:5 (ESV)

Surely I was sinful from birth,
sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

Psalm 51:5 (NIV)

…as it is written,
"No one is righteous, no, not one;
     no one understands,
     no one seeks God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
     no one does good,
     not even one."

Romans 3:10-12 (ESV)

The Christian doctrine of original sin is important in Western societies. This awareness of how deeply the problem of sin runs in humans has led to political and church structures that purposely built in checks and balances to account for the presence of sin – even in people who may be friendly and well-meaning (see very old posts here and also here). There is an inbuilt assumption that leaders may do what is wrong – even if they were popular and trusted enough to have been elected in the first place!

3. Implications for the dynamics and structure of leadership

By contrast in Chinese culture there is an inherent assumption that leaders will
do what is right. There is an inbuilt tendency to believe that the
elderly patriarch of the family will do the right thing. That the society leader
will not abuse his power. That the one in charge will look after us. And as a result, there’s no need to worry about the details. What – don’t you trust me?

And that’s because the Chinese concept of leadership assumes a good lien. The leader is seen as virtuous and ‘right’ – and so why not allow them to have complete control? why would you want to question their actions? what are you saying, by wanting to put in checks and balances?

You can see this working itself out in the dynamics of leadership – in how relationships play out within leadership structures.

Because of course, the facade does slip. The patriarch is a drunkard – the leader embezzles, or lies. And abuses his power. But even then, all those around the leader will maintain the facade. They will fight to preserve the lien of their leader – because it is too traumatic for the group to acknowledge that they have a leader who does not have a good lien.

And so all through Chinese history, even though emperor after emperor is revealed to be corrupt, trust is still placed in the concept of the emperor – and yet another emperor is installed. And today even though corruption has been a newspaper issue in Asian societies for many years, it’s still there. Because underlings cannot bear to damage the lien of their leader. It is too traumatic!

But not only can you see this trust in the inherent goodness of leaders in the dynamics of leadership, you can also see it in leadership structures themselves.

An interesting example is how committees tend to function (see earlier post).You would have thought that the collectivism of Chinese
culture would lead to flat structures and equality among people in a
committee – but here you’re wrong! Chinese (even ABCs) tend to prefer committees with
strong chairpersons and compliant members. And that’s because the
assumption of the lien of the chairperson brushes aside any worry that he might misuse his power, or have misconceived ideas.

And even if leadership structures do have checks and balances (such as structures adopted directly from the West), it’s really poor form to actually consider making use of them – if not downright dangerous to call for a vote! Or openly question the government in a newspaper! Or put forward an opposition party! Because – what are you saying?

4. Original sin and Chinese Christians

Among Chinese Christians the doctrine of original sin is taught, of course. But does it actually inform the behaviour
of Chinese Christians? or is it merely given lip service? is it applied unevenly?