Rosemont and Confucius on Human Nature
In his essay Human Rights: An East Asian Response, Henry Rosemont Jr. ... Rosemont’s argument is that no one can be truly successful if those around him live in poverty or similar; all society should be based on a community, and all rights should favor this community over the individual. ... But Rosemont doesn’t believe all this personal freedom, in the sense Americans typically see it, to be such a good thing; rather, he sees a nation that takes care of its sick and frail, makes sure every mouth is fed and body clothed, and rewards good deeds while punishing bad to be far above one who thrusts its denizens to a battleground where only the craftiest and cruelest survive, like some sick blood sport. Rosemont might even argue Communism to not be such a bad thing at all, in the Marxist sense, if you could keep corruption from ruining the experiment. Armchair patriots across the nation would likely disagree with the argument Rosemont presents concerning the proper human rights. ... To Confucius, however, “exemplary persons in making their way in the world are neither bent on nor against anything; rather, they go with what is appropriate. ... To our subject, the sense of duty to community Rosemont promotes seems akin to treason for simple reasons; what if his neighbor turns out to be untrustworthy? ... These residual effects offer little chance for this nation to ever adopt a community-based society like what Confucius and Rosemont offer; we might all speak Spanish first. ... This sort of taking care of those around you is part of the core of the Eastern philosophical ideas endorsed by Rosemont.