Learn From US Election (1)

The main purpose of this writeup is to help the reader to appreciate politics in the West in an effective way (Of course it does not replace textbooks, papers, or references. It only addresses problems Chinese often encounter.) After years of discussion of US politics with Mainland Chinese, I gradually realized that language is not the main obstacle for Mainland Chinese to understand US politics. Many will never understand politics in the West even after learning good English. There are several reasons. 1) Many Mainland Chinese try, consciously or unconsciously, to map US politics into Chinese politics. His/her Chinese political image is usually formed from education in China or from Chinese classics, history, literature, or contemporary politics (i.e. the CCP version of politics). One can never understand Western politics this way. [1,2] outlines the evolution of Western political philosophy in the last 2500 years. Chinese political philosophy has no intersection with the Western one. 2) The root of Western politics has two sources: Greek philosophy and Judeo-Christian religion. They are totally different from China’s philosophy. For example, rule by law originated in the Middle East and both the Roman Empire and ancient Greece had some form of rule of law. This was two thousand and five hundred years ago. Since then, rule of law has always been part of politics in the Middle East and Europe. On the other hand, China never had either rule by law or rule of law. (See the end of this writeup for a description from a textbook.) When a Chinese person hears rule of law, often conjuring it as the Emperor’s or high-ranking officials’ decree. Thus, even if you use similar vocabulary, it often results in different ideas. 3) Many Mainland Chinese think or reason within the confines of Marxism. This often severely limits their abilities to understand, think, or reason, thus preventing them from understanding real Western politics.  

To appreciate the limitations of Chinese politics, refer to [1,2]. [2] has a diagram depicting the progress of Western political philosophy in the last 2500 years. [2] also commented that Chinese politics is completely left of the main diagram. Of course, there are commonalities among the politics of different civilizations. Therefore, one may find some similar features between Chinese politics and US politics. But if you are not aware of the fundamental differences between Chinese politics and the US politics, you are likely to misread and misinterpret US politics. 

Rule of law implies that the law rules not man. Hayek commented that the Rule of Law means "the laws must be general, equal and certain."[3]  It means that ruling is independent of politics. Another basic knowledge is fair trial. Understanding what is a fair trial is both a basic and important step to appreciate the rule of law. After you have gained basic legal knowledge, it is easy to know that the legal cases charged against Donald Trump are largely false, and likely politically motivated. Politically motivated often implies that those in power charge their political opponents not based on facts but on their intention. The top priority of the rule of law is to prevent those in power from prosecuting their opponents. Most textbooks will explain this. The rule of law is to limit those in power to prosecute the opponents. 

If you listen carefully to unbiased legal experts on the charges against Donald Trump. Most have little or no merit. The one which does have some merit (mishandling secret documents) the Department of Justice did not apply justice evenly (i.e. not general, equal and certain). (Comparing it against those of Joe Biden, Hilary Clinton, etc.). 

One good thing is that the majority of American voters saw through these lawsuits. After each case was charged, the poll rose. On the other hand, such abuse of power opens bad precedents. The most important is that it reduces citizens’ faith in the rule of law. Another bad thing is that it increases divisions among citizens. Not every citizen knows the rule of law well. Some accept the lawsuits at face value. They cause conflicts which should not exist. 

References: 

1. Steven B. Smith, "Political Philosophy," Yale University Press, 2012.   

2. 韩家亮：政治哲学发展一览 http://hx.cnd.org/?p=186764

3. Brian Z. Tamanaha, "On the Rule of Law: History, Politics, Theory," Cambridge University Press, 2004. p.66

4. Bill Barr says Trump's federal, state legal cases 'not going to go forward' after win (11-7)

Francis Fukuyama, "Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy," Farrar, Straus and Giroux,  2014. 

 p.357 

China represents the one world civilization that never developed a true rule of law.  In ancient Israel, the Christian West, the Muslim world, and India, law originated in a transcendental religion and was interpreted and implemented by a hierarchy of religious scholars and jurists.  The keepers of the law in each case were a social group separate from the political authorities -- Jewish judges, Hindu Brahmins, Catholic priests and bishops, the Muslim ulama.  The degree to which the law limited the arbitrary power of rulers depended on the institutional separation of legal-religious hierarchy from the political one, as well as the degree to which one or the other group was united or divided.  This separation …… 

In China, by contrast, there was never a transcendental religion, and there was never a pretense that law had a divine origin.  Law was seen as a rational human instrument by which the state exercised its authority and maintained public order.  This meant that, as in Japan, China had rule by law rather rule of law.  …… Rights were rather the gift of a benevolent ruler.  ….   

中国代表世界上一种从没有发展真正法治的文明。古以色列，基督教的西方，穆斯林世界，和印度，法产生于一种超越的宗教并且存在有组织的宗教学者和法学家解释和贯彻它。每种情况下一批与政治权势分开的社会群体专门负责法：犹太法官，印度波罗门族，天主教神父和主教，穆斯林欧莱玛((Ulama) 。法在多大程度上限制统治者的权力取决于宗教和政治在机制上分开还是结合的程度。这个分别在西欧最突出，十一世纪后期的 investiture conflict 使教廷能够任命自己的教职人员。欧洲在国家建立以前已经先有了法治，这与中国成鲜明对照，中国在国家建立以前没有法不存在法治。

 Pp.357-8 

与欧洲相比，中国从来不存在超越的宗教，所以中国的法从来没有神圣来源。法被看作国家行使权力和维持公共秩序的工具。这意味着类似于日本，中国过去只有法制没有法治，法的最终来自统治者。虽然法律可能不存偏见的实现，但这与公民是否有自有权利无关。权利来自统治者的赏赐。公平是为了公共秩序的考虑。这是为什么古中国一般只考虑个人与政府的法律，而很少考虑其它法律，例如人与人之间的法例如合同法，侵权等。