Tango and Suffering: A Path to Liberation

Tango is a living expression of the profound bond between suffering and human aspiration. Born in the marginalized neighborhoods of Argentina, tango emerged from communities marked by hardship, displacement, and longing. Immigrants, laborers, and the socially forgotten shaped it into a vessel for expressing their desire for love, connection, and harmony amid adversity. In this sense, tango stands as a poignant symbol of the human condition: it transforms suffering into beauty and gestures toward a path of liberation. (See Tango: Historical and Cultural Impacts.)

The Dual Perspectives on Suffering

Suffering has long occupied the center of philosophical inquiry, giving rise to two broad perspectives on its origin and resolution: one rooted in the idea of inherent human deficiency, the other in the belief in inherent human goodness.

The first perspective holds that human beings are fundamentally flawed, driven by self-interest and competition. From this standpoint, suffering is inevitable, arising from the struggle for survival in a world of limited resources.

This worldview appears in various traditions:

• Legalism asserts that people are naturally selfish and must be controled through              strict laws and punishments.
• Buddhism locates the source of suffering in desire and attachment, urging                          transcendence of the ego.
• Christianity interprets suffering as a consequence of human fallenness, offering                redemption through faith.
• Darwinism frames life as competition governed by natural selection and survival of        the fittest, maintaining that strength is the path to success.
• Individualism elevates self-reliance, highlighting personal effort.

Despite their differences, these perspectives share a common limitation: they treat suffering primarily as an individual condition to be managed—through discipline, transcendence, withdrawal, competition, or self-empowerment. In doing so, they often overlook the fundamentally social nature of human existence. Some work against human nature, while others implicitly accept that one person’s gain may come at another’s expense. As a result, they risk reinforcing the very conditions that give rise to suffering. (See Darwinism and Confucianism.)

The Perspective of Inherent Goodness

In contrast, the idea of inherent goodness—most clearly articulated in Confucianism—offers a more relational and optimistic understanding of human nature. It begins with a simple insight: human beings do not exist in isolation but are born into relationships. A child raised in a nurturing environment naturally develops trust, empathy, and kindness, revealing an original moral potential rooted in our social nature.

From this perspective, what we call “evil” does not arise from human nature itself but from distorted social conditions. When people are shaped by inequality, competition, and fragmentation, their innate tendencies toward empathy and generosity may be suppressed or redirected into defensive behaviors.

Accordingly, the solution to suffering lies not in denying human nature or eliminating rivals, but in creating conditions in which goodness can flourish:

• A just and nurturing environment fosters empathy, cooperation, and moral                       development.
• A hostile and competitive environment breeds alienation, insecurity, and conflict.

Liberation from suffering, therefore, is not solely an individual pursuit but a collective endeavor. It requires building social structures that harmonize individual interests, reduce unnecessary conflict, and promote mutual benefit. It also calls for moral cultivation—nurturing empathy, responsibility, and a sense of shared humanity. (See Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization.)

Tango as a Reflection of Human Connection

Tango vividly embodies this relational understanding of human nature. At its core, it is a dance of connection—of listening, responding, and co-creating between partners. It does not thrive on competition but on cooperation, where meaning arises through sensitivity, trust, and shared awareness.

Within the embrace, two individuals transcend their separateness. They communicate without words, through presence, intention, and subtle physical dialogue. Their movement becomes a conversation, revealing a deeper truth: fulfillment does not arise from domination or withdrawal, but from attunement to another.

In this way, tango reflects the Confucian insight that human flourishing is rooted in relationships. It demonstrates, in lived experience, that harmony is not the erasure of difference but the coordination of distinct roles within a shared structure.

The worldwide appeal of tango further suggests that people are naturally drawn to such experiences of connection. Its lasting attraction lies not only in its aesthetic qualities but in its affirmation of something deeply human—the longing to belong, to connect, and to be cherished. (See Tango Is a Relationship.)

The Path to Liberation

Tango began as the voice of the marginalized, yet it has grown into a universal language of hope. Its embrace carries a quiet but profound message: human happiness and suffering are relational—we are not meant to experience either in isolation.

If suffering arises not from human nature itself but from the conditions we create, then liberation depends on how we choose to relate—to ourselves, to others, and to the structures that shape our lives. A society grounded in cooperation rather than hostility, and in harmony rather than conflict, can cultivate the goodness inherent in each individual.

The lesson of tango is both simple and insightful. The root of suffering is isolation and fierce competition; the path to liberation lies in relationship, connection, sharing, and the willingness to move together. In this way, tango offers not only a dance, but a vision—a quiet guide toward a more humane and hopeful future. (See The Freedom in Tango.)

Understanding China: Yellow River and the Character of the Chinese Nation

China is a vast country, comparable in size to Europe. Roughly two-thirds of its landmass is mountainous, with terrain that rises in the west and gradually descends toward the east. The western region is dominated by towering mountain ranges, many exceeding 5,000 meters in elevation. Chief among them are the Himalayas, whose highest peak soars to 8,848 meters above sea level. In contrast, the eastern region transitions into a broad plain, dipping to below 50 meters above sea level.

The Yellow River, China’s second longest, originates in the Bayan Har Mountains of Qinghai Province at an altitude of 5,369 meters. It flows from west to east, traversing the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, the Loess Plateau, the Inner Mongolia Plateau, and the North China Plain, before emptying into the Bohai Sea. Its basin covers approximately 795,000 square kilometers and spans nine provinces: Qinghai, Sichuan, Gansu, Ningxia, Inner Mongolia, Shaanxi, Shanxi, Henan, and Shandong.

Millions of years ago, the area east of the Taihang Mountains in central North China (indicated on the map below) was part of the ocean. The North China Plain—occupying the upper two-thirds of the green area on the map—was formed through the accumulation of sediment from the Yellow River over millions of years. Flowing through the Loess Plateau, the river collects an immense amount of silt, making its water literally yellow. It transports 1.6 billion tons of sediment downstream every year, about a quarter of which settles along the river’s course, and the rest washes into the Bohai Sea. The buildup of silt in the river’s lower reaches gradually raises the riverbed. Every once in a while, the Yellow River changes its course due to the blockage of large amounts of sediment. Wherever the terrain is lower, that's where the diverted river flows, carrying sediment with it and filling in depressions. For millions of years, sediment from the Yellow River has filled the low areas back and forth, created the vast North China Plain, which is larger than Britain. Today, the Yellow River is still reclaiming land from the sea and steadily pushing the coastline eastward. Scientists estimated that the Bohai Sea may be filled in within a few hundred years, further expanding the North China Plain.

Archaeology has revealed that eight thousand years ago people were already living on this land created by the Yellow River. The North China Plain—the cradle of Chinese civilization—has long been the most densely populated, economically vibrant, and culturally prosperous region in China, thanks to its fertile soil, temperate climate, and abundant rainfall brought by the Pacific monsoon, which made this region ideal for agriculture.

While the Yellow River has nourished the people living on this land it created, it has also brought them devastation. As the riverbed rose, people were forced to continuously reinforce embankments to protect farmland and settlements on both sides. Over time, the riverbed gradually rose above the surrounding ground; in some areas, it now stands 5–10 meters above the terrain, turning the river into a "hanging river." Once an embankment breaks, it unleashes catastrophic flooding, sweeping away everything in its path. Historical records show that, in the past 2,500 years, the Yellow River has burst its banks 1,593 times and changed its course 26 times. Each time the river floods, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people are killed or displaced. The Yellow River flood of 1897, related to Western invasion and domestic unrest, claimed the lives of two to seven million people. In 1938, due to the Japanese invasion of China, the breach of the Yellow River at Huayuankou resulted in the deaths of approximately 400,000 to 900,000 people, and displaced tens of millions more.

Efforts to manage the river have never stopped since ancient times. Perhaps no people in the world have had such a complex and paradoxical relationship with their mother river as the Chinese. They are deeply grateful for the nourishment she provides, yet they also harbor sorrow and frustration over her destructive force. But it is precisely through this intimate, turbulent relationship that the Yellow River has forged the perseverance, tenacity, hard work, and resilience of the Chinese people.

Chinese parents often use strict discipline to train their children, preparing them to face the severe challenges of life. This is not unrelated to the fact that they themselves grew up under the temper of the Yellow River. Westerners who embrace individualism tend to prioritize children’s independence and self-expression. Chinese parenting emphasizes perseverance, endurance, responsibility, and team spirit. This approach is deeply connected to their harsh living environment. In front of the Yellow River, individuals are insignificant. Controlling the Yellow River relies on collective strength. Therefore, Chinese philosophy places great emphasis on collectivism and teamwork. Western philosophy conceptualizes individuals as independent actors, prioritizing personal interests over collective concerns. In contrast, Chinese philosophy perceives individuals as interconnected and interdependent members of society with shared interests, responsibilities, and a common destiny. This prioritization of collective concerns over individual interests is heavily influenced by their shared burden imposed by the Yellow River.

The rich, fertile, yet troubled land of the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River allows the people living there to not only enjoy the blessings of the river but also face the challenges it brings. This paradox has nurtured the dialectical thinking of the Chinese people. Unlike Westerners who often perceive things in stark black-and-white terms, the Chinese recognize that opposing forces coexist in all things, much like the river itself. Good fortune and misfortune, they believe, are intertwined. This awareness enables them to approach life with balance and equanimity, foresee the opposite outcome, remain cautious in times of peace, and find opportunity in adversity. Chinese philosophy discourages simplistic and extreme ideologies like individualism, feminism, Darwinism, unipolarism, hegemonism, or zero-sum thinking. Instead, it embraces the idea that diverse elements complement and coexist peacefully, akin to the harmony between the sexes. The Confucian doctrine of the mean advocates for moderation, balance, and harmony amid opposites. This seemingly modest approach allows them to coexist harmoniously within an environment that is both contradictory and integrated. This orientation also underlies the traditional Chinese aversion to factionalism and partisan politics—a perspective shaped, in part, by the need to maintain unity and cooperation in the face of natural disasters. (See Understanding China: Philosophies That Separate Two Worlds.)

The Yellow River is also a reason why China, despite its many periods of division throughout its millennia-long history, has always returned to unity. This great river has instilled the spirit of unity into the soul of the Chinese people. Managing the Yellow River—an enormous task that spans vast territories and demands massive manpower, meticulous planning, and nationwide coordination—necessitates a unified, centralized government with strong planning and organizational capabilities. This need has deeply influenced China's political development. The emphasis on unity and stability in Chinese political culture is rooted in the recognition that only a unified country with a stable and capable government can manage a river of such scale. In fact, the origins of Chinese state power can be traced back to river management. Dayu, the founder of the Xia Dynasty (circa 2070 BC–1600 BC), the first dynasty recorded in Chinese history, was revered for organizing the people to regulate the Yellow River. With thousands of years of experience, the Chinese have become skilled at mass mobilization and organization, honing themselves into the most disciplined and well-managed people. This collective capability has enabled China to weather its greatest challenges. By contrast, the Western political model—based on individualism and partisanship, where competing interest groups take turns governing—may serve special interests well, but it does not align with China’s unique needs.

In conclusion, the character, philosophy, culture, and political system of the Chinese nation are deeply rooted in their relationship with the Yellow River. This influential river nurtures the people to embody qualities such as resilience, solidarity, generosity, magnanimity, and wisdom—reflecting the attributes of their mother river. A civilization that has endured and overcome such severe challenges for millennia is formidable—and must never be underestimated.

(See also: Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and the Chinese-Style Modernization.)

Darwinism and Confucianism

English naturalist and biologist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) is widely regarded as one of the most influential figures in Western intellectual history. His groundbreaking work, On the Origin of Species (1859), fundamentally reshaped the way the West understands the natural world.

Darwin's theory is based on the idea of natural selection. Organisms with advantageous traits are more likely to survive and reproduce. This is largely due to the fact that variations occur within all populations of organisms. Throughout the lives of the individuals their genomes interact with their environments to cause random mutations arise in the genome, which can be passed on to offspring. If a particular trait enhances survival and reproductive success, it becomes more prevalent over generations, driving the evolution of species.

Although most scientists now accept evolution as descent with modification, not all concur with Darwin's assertion that natural selection is the primary—though not exclusive—mechanism behind it. Some advanced competing theories that assigned a more limited role to natural selection. Critics argued that Darwin overemphasized the "struggle for existence" and "survival of the fittest" among individuals, while underestimating the role of interdependence, cooperation, and ecological balance—both within and among species—in ensuring survival and evolutionary success. (See Pluralism vs. Monism.)

While Darwin’s theory revolutionized biology and our understanding of life itself, it also produced adverse impacts. Concepts such as "struggle for existence" and "survival of the fittest" were misapplied to human societies, giving rise to ideologies like social Darwinism, individualism, exceptionalism, racism, "might makes right" and "law of the jungle" thinking, zero-sum competition, and unipolar hegemony. These distortions eroded human solidarity, social harmony, and prospects for peace. The harm caused by these ideologies should not be underestimated: Western civilization, particularly in the post-Darwin era, has been marked by imperialism, colonialism, conquest, genocide, exploitation, and plundering—with Darwin’s fellow countrymen playing a central role. These ideologies also fueled Western capitalism that led to brutal competitions, massive inequality, resource depletion, ecological destruction, and environmental degradation. (See Democracy vs. Plutocracy.)

By contrast, Darwinism has had less ideological influence in the East, where Confucianism has long shaped cultural and philosophical foundations. Confucian thought emphasizes harmony between man and nature and among species, the shared destiny of humankind, and the ideal of peaceful coexistence. It offers a holistic worldview that regards the universe as an interconnected whole rather than a battlefield of competing interests, asserting that harmony, moderation and compromise are the fundamental laws of nature (see Meeting in the Middle). While acknowledging contradictions and tensions, Confucianism seeks to resolve them through balance, mutual dependence, and the integration of diverse elements—discouraging antagonism and the elimination of adversaries (see Understanding China: Philosophies That Separate Two Worlds).

Where Darwinism stresses the instinct for individual survival, Confucianism elevates the moral and intellectual potential of human beings above primal impulses. Confucius articulated this ethical vision through five core virtues: 仁 (ren—benevolence, compassion, and love), 義 (yi—righteousness, justice, and equity), 禮 (li—propriety, morality, and law), 智 (zhi—wisdom, knowledge, and reason), and 信 (xin—trust, integrity, and good faith). Unlike the animal world, where the strong prey upon the weak, Confucianism holds that human civilization must transcend the "law of the jungle." The flourishing of society depends on moral cultivation, social cooperation, and the collective pursuit of the common good. (See Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization).

While it is still too early to render a definitive judgment on the relative merits of Eastern versus Western philosophies, current global trends suggest that values rooted in enlightened civilization, collectivism, cooperation, and shared prosperity may ultimately serve humanity better than those driven by barbarism, individualism, selfishness, and ruthless competition. The rise of the East and the relative decline of the West point to the enduring relevance of Confucian values.

This philosophical divergence also echoes in cultural expressions such as tango, where human fulfillment emerges not from domination and conquer, but from attunement to one another. (See Tango and Suffering: A Pathway to Liberation).

Democracy vs. Plutocracy

American political thought is fundamentally atomistic, rooted in the belief that individuals are autonomous beings endowed with inalienable rights to pursue their own self-interest. This philosophical foundation normalizes intense competition, where a few emerge as winners while the majority are left behind. Those who succeed in this system often consolidate their power by forming political parties, which claim to represent the public but primarily compete for influence and control.

Elections serve as the formal mechanism through which these parties alternate power. Over time, practices such as political donations, lobbying, and media campaigning have been redefined as forms of free speech, allowing those with greater resources to dominate the political arena. As a result, elections become increasingly ideological and media-driven, shaped by those who have the means to sway public opinion. Ultimately, this dynamic fosters a political landscape in which policies tend to favor the wealthy, deepening social and economic inequality.

With elections increasingly vulnerable to financial influence, misinformation, and character attacks, American politics has become deeply contentious. Elected officials often prioritize performative rhetoric and media attention over effective governance, focusing more on pleasing donors and securing re-election than advancing the public good. The frequent shifts in party control lead to erratic policy reversals, undermining long-term planning and institutional stability. Each administration tends to overspend, accumulate debt, and resort to printing money to inflate short-term approval—leaving the economic consequences to future governments. Meanwhile, partisan gridlock paralyzes decision-making and intensifies social division.

Despite these dysfunctions, many Americans still regard the current system as the only legitimate form of democracy. In practice, however, the U.S. political system operates more as a partisan democracy than a people’s democracy. Increasingly, scholars argue that it has morphed into a plutocracy—rule by the wealthy and well-connected. Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz famously characterized the United States as a nation “of the 1%, by the 1%, and for the 1%.” Backed by powerful special interests, political elites often sideline the needs and voices of the broader population.

The consequences of this distorted system are stark. The U.S. has the highest levels of inequality among developed nations, and during the COVID-19 pandemic, it suffered a death toll over 170 times higher than China’s and an infection rate 1,600 times greater. Decades of financial mismanagement have pushed the national debt beyond $30 trillion, much of it channeled into private contractors, defense budgets, and corporate subsidies. Meanwhile, deep-rooted social problems—ranging from racial conflict and poverty to drug addiction and gun violence—continue to plague the nation.

With less than a quarter of the population of China or India, the U.S. nonetheless has the world’s largest prison population. Its healthcare system is the most expensive globally, yet millions remain uninsured or underinsured. Retirement ages have steadily climbed, placing increasing burdens on the elderly. According to the U.S. Life Insurance Guide, the average retirement age is 67.9 for men and 66.5 for women, compared to China’s 60 for men, 55 for women. Public education is in decline, infrastructure is aging, and the country has been at war for 229 of its 245-year history. These conflicts, often justified in the name of “American values,” perpetuate high military spending, weapons exports, and global dominance—primarily serving entrenched economic and political interests.

Although this system is labeled a democracy, the average American has increasingly little influence over the decisions that shape their daily lives.

In contrast, Chinese political thought is fundamentally holistic, emphasizing the interdependence of individuals within the broader social fabric. Human rights in China are framed in terms of collective well-being rather than individual autonomy. These rights encompass not only personal freedom but also values such as coexistence, equality, cooperation, and social harmony. Whereas American thought tends to view individuals as independent actors pursuing self-interest, Chinese thought sees people as intrinsically connected, with mutual obligations to family, community, and society. Rooted in Confucian tradition, this perspective prioritizes ethical behavior, consensus-building, and the pursuit of communal interests as essential to maintaining social stability and order. (See Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization.)

China adopts a model of people’s democracy, prioritizing collective governance over partisan competition. While individual interests vary, leadership is expected to represent the broader will of the population. With a 5,000-year tradition of governance, China has historically recognized both the risks of factionalism and the importance of unified political leadership. The Communist Party of China (CCP), comprising nearly 100 million members, positions national interest above partisan agendas. Leadership selection occurs every five years through the CCP National Congress and the National People’s Congress, with candidates evaluated based on character, competence, and proven achievement, rather than rhetoric or ideology. Policy development involves extensive research, public consultation, and meticulous planning to balance short-term priorities with long-term national goals. Unlike the U.S., where governance often reflects special interest influence, China’s system seeks to foster a just and harmonious society rooted in shared prosperity. Institutional safeguards—including collective leadership, term limits, anti-corruption measures, public supervision, and internal discipline—aim to enhance accountability and prevent authoritarianism.

Differences in human rights perspectives shape how each country approaches key issues. In the U.S., COVID-19 precautions were largely seen as a matter of personal choice, with individual liberty prioritized over collective protection. In contrast, China placed public health first, with temporary restrictions widely accepted for the greater good. Similarly, Americans often view gun control as an infringement on personal freedom, whereas the Chinese regard strict firearm laws as essential for public safety. In the U.S., business regulation is frequently seen as a constraint on economic freedom, while in China, such oversight is viewed as necessary to reduce inequality. Intellectual property in the U.S. is tightly protected, often limit accessibility and innovation, while China promotes shared technological advancement to accelerate national development. And while the U.S. frequently invokes individual rights to justify foreign interventions, China considers such actions—including the instigation of color revolutions and conflicts under the banner of democracy—as violations of national sovereignty and human rights.

No political system is immune to failure. History teaches that if a nation fails to confront its ideological, institutional, and systemic flaws, decline is inevitable. The dominance of special interests—such as corporate lobbies and the military-industrial complex—erodes democratic legitimacy and public trust. Drawing from China’s long history, the collapse of a democracy under the weight of corruption and plutocracy may take less than three centuries (see Understanding China: The Vicious Circle of Regime Change). This is why Chinese political culture values collectivism and egalitarianism over individualism. As China rises, Confucian values are poised to play a larger role in shaping global political thought—an evolution worth noting and, perhaps, celebrating. (See Pluralism vs. Monism.)

Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization

Five thousand years ago, tribal alliances and city-states began to form in the Yellow River and Yangtze River basins of East Asia. Over time, these burgeoning civilizations coalesced into a single entity—China—which gradually expanded until it encountered formidable natural barriers on all sides. To the northeast lay the icy expanse of Siberia; to the north, the vast and desolate deserts of Mongolia. The west was dominated by towering mountain ranges, with peaks exceeding 5,000 meters, including the Himalayas, home to Mount Everest at 8,848 meters. The south and east faced the immense Pacific Ocean. In ancient times, the lack of modern transportation rendered these geographical obstacles nearly insurmountable, effectively isolating China from the outside world. Enclosed by these natural defenses, the Yellow and Yangtze River basins benefited from a temperate climate and abundant rainfall brought by the Pacific monsoon, making them ideal for agriculture. This unique geographical setting played a decisive role in shaping the development and character of Chinese civilization.

China's geographical barriers enabled it to sustain a homogeneous population and cultivate a unique and remarkable culture, largely shielding it from foreign influence and aggression. This seclusion allowed China to be the only ancient civilization to develop uninterrupted over more than five millennia. However, these natural defenses also constrained the Chinese worldview. Surrounded by these barriers, the Chinese perceived their land as the core of the world—referred to as 天下, meaning “all under heaven.” At its center lay the Yellow River and Yangtze River basins, which is why China is called 中國, or “central country.”

Blessed with fertile lands and abundant resources, China prospered significantly more than the surrounding frontier regions. Chinese peasants, living in kinship-based villages, developed strong ties to their arable lands and displayed little interest in the barren territories beyond, fostering a reserved and introspective disposition. Rather than pursue military expansion, the Chinese constructed the Great Wall to protect themselves from northern nomads. This 21,000-kilometer Wall, situated along the 400 mm isoprecipitation line and stretching from east to west, symbolized the division between sedentary agricultural societies and nomadic cultures.

Nomadic tribes that crossed the Wall and settled in China were eventually assimilated into the farming culture, becoming Chinese themselves. Thus, Chinese civilization, shaped by its geography, epitomized the triumph of a settled, productive way of life over a nomadic, predatory existence. The Chinese people's connection to the land, their introspective temperament, their reverence for nature, and their emphasis on harmony between man and the environment, along with their patience and long-term perspective, all stem from their agricultural roots. The Chinese have long taken pride in their land, culture, and way of life, as China remained the world’s most advanced civilization until the onset of the Industrial Revolution.

This geographical seclusion also fostered a monistic rather than pluralistic vision of the world. Unlike the Western notion of a world composed of multiple sovereign states, the ancient Chinese viewed the world as an integrated whole, with China as its sole civilized center. This worldview made the concept of 大一統 (Great Unity) a core element of Chinese cultural identity. Surrounding ethnic tribes were regarded as vassals within the Chinese tributary system, many of which were gradually sinicized and incorporated into China.

Scholars have noted that China's agrarian lifestyle necessitated a coordinated approach to managing water resources, contributing to the rise of a centralized state that emphasizes national unity and cooperation (see Understanding China: Yellow River and the Character of the Chinese Nation). Throughout its history, China has experienced the rise and fall of numerous dynasties, some of which were of foreign origin, yet each cycle ultimately ended in reunification rather than permanent fragmentation (see Understanding China: The Vicious Circle of Regime Change).

The first unification occurred in 221 BC, when the state of 秦 (pronounced “chin,” from which “China” is derived) defeated all rival states and established a unified dynasty. The 秦 standardized laws, scripts, currency, weights, measures, and even vehicle tracks, abolishing feudal fiefdoms in favor of a system of prefectures and counties. This advanced system laid the foundation for China’s enduring stability and prosperity and was adopted by all subsequent dynasties. The development of the Chinese political system and culture has exhibited a remarkable capacity for assimilation and integration, inspiring neighboring states to emulate it. Throughout history, various ethnic groups that partially or entirely conquered China were eventually absorbed into Chinese culture. This process of sinicization, rather than military expansion, accounts for the vast extent of China’s territory.

Aligned with this monistic worldview, Confucianism promotes a vision of society as an integrated whole. The 大同 (Great Harmony) society, an ideal described in Confucian classics, envisions a harmonious world where the wise govern, the honest live peacefully, the vulnerable are protected, and crime is nonexistent. In contrast to the Western emphasis on individualism, which often prioritizes personal interests and can pit the strong against the weak, causing egocentrism and conflict, Confucianism envisions society as an extended family, where members cooperate, seek common ground, prioritize communal interests over personal ones, and work collaboratively.

In Confucianism, individuals are not viewed as isolated and autonomous but as integral members of society, born into specific relationships with defined roles and responsibilities. They adhere to etiquettes designed to maintain social harmony—akin to tango dancers observing milonga codes in the milongas. These etiquettes or proprieties were practiced even before Confucius's time by the people of the Western Zhou Dynasty (11th–8th century BC). Confucius (551 BC–479 BC) and his disciples were scholars and ardent advocates of these ancient rites. Ultimately, Confucianism is rooted in a tradition that remains central to Chinese culture.

This tradition emphasizes the importance of harmonious relationships among people and society as a whole. Confucianism holds that societal stability depends on a solid foundation: the people. A ruler, much like the head of a family, derives authority from the people and is responsible for their welfare. As Confucius stated, “The ruler is the boat; the people are the water. Water can carry the boat, or overturn it.” Mencius (372 BC–289 BC), another prominent Confucian sage, echoed this sentiment, asserting that the people are the most important, followed by the state, with the monarch being the least. Confucianism teaches that a ruler’s legitimacy stems from the support or mandate of the people, and an unrighteous ruler will lose that mandate. In essence, Confucianism represents a people-centered collectivist humanism, in stark contrast to the individualistic humanism of the West. This collectivist humanism has shaped Chinese governance ideals that continue to this day—from Confucius's "天下為为公" (the world belongs to all people), to Sun Yat-sen's "Three Principles of the People," to the founding of the People's Republic of China, to the CCP's mission of serving the people, and to Xi Jinping's call for a community with a shared future for mankind (see Democracy vs. Plutocracy).

Rooted in this people-centered collectivist humanism, Confucianism advocates for benevolent governance. Confucius believed that benevolence (仁) is the essence of human nature, distinguishing humans from other animals. When a student asked him about the meaning of benevolence, Confucius replied, "To love others." Unlike Machiavelli, who separated morality from politics, Confucius viewed morality as the cornerstone of governance. He insisted that the ruler should be a saint at heart, a moral leader, and a role model; only through self-cultivation can he manage his family, govern his country, and bring peace to the world.

While Confucius emphasized the importance of proprieties (禮), he asserted that these observances must be grounded in benevolence; otherwise, they become hollow gestures. His followers, however, divided into two camps. The school that prioritized benevolence later became recognized as the orthodoxy of Confucianism. The school that emphasized proprieties evolved into Legalism. The unification of China by the 秦 state in 221 BC was achieved through military power and severe penal laws under the influence of the Legalist school of thought. Due to its brutality, the 秦 Dynasty lasted only two rulers before being overthrown by widespread rebellions.

Learning from this lesson, in 134 BC, Emperor Wu of the Western Han Dynasty accepted the advice of Confucian scholar Dong Zhongshu (179 BC–104 BC) to replace other schools of thought with Confucianism and implement benevolent rule. Since then, Confucianism has become the official ideology of China. Unlike Christianity and Machiavellianism, which posit that human nature is inherently evil, Confucianism asserts that human nature is inherently good. Consequently, it opposes the Legalist reliance on strict laws and harsh punishments as primary tools of governance, advocating instead for rule through virtue and education. This philosophy has given rise to the Chinese tradition of prioritizing morality and learning.

In 587 AD, Emperor Wen of the Sui Dynasty established the imperial examination system, linking education with civil service. This meritocratic system played a pivotal role in shaping China’s effective political bureaucracy. It further solidified the status of Confucianism, promoted Confucian scholarship, and opened doors for talented individuals from all walks of life to enter politics, thereby giving rise to the scholar-official class. China’s contemporary civil servant selection system is a continuation of this legacy. Many researchers argue that, compared to Western electoral democracy, China’s meritocratic system is better equipped to produce leaders with moral integrity, professional knowledge, and strong abilities, as evidenced by China’s illustrious history and modern economic achievements. However, the imperial examination system historically failed to prevent the recurrence of dynastic cycles. Today, China seeks to address this through political reforms, such as collective decision-making, age and term limits for officials, initiatives for clean governance, self-correction mechanisms, disciplinary inspections, anti-corruption campaigns, public oversight, reporting and petitioning mechanisms, and impeachment procedures. These efforts aim to improve governance, ensure accountability, and prevent the emergence of autocracy (see Understanding China: The Vicious Circle of Regime Change).

Based on this people-centered collectivist humanism, Confucianism also calls for equitable wealth distribution and condemns prioritizing economic interests over morality, employing unethical means to accumulate wealth, competing for monetary gain, and exacerbating the gap between rich and poor. Confucians argued that rulers should disperse the nation’s wealth among the people rather than compete with them for profit. As Confucius stated, “Rulers should not worry about not having enough, but about inequality.” This ethos inspired Chinese rulers throughout history to adopt egalitarian policies and enact benevolent governance.

The emphasis on morality over economy, however, historically led to the devaluation of merchants within traditional Chinese society, where they ranked below scholars, farmers, and craftsmen. China’s early post-1949 policies reflected this Confucian tendency, prioritizing morality and scholarship over economic development. During the reform and opening-up period initiated by Deng Xiaoping, the government shifted its focus to encourage business and entrepreneurship. Subsequently, the Chinese government targeted poverty alleviation programs and anti-monopoly efforts, upholding Confucian egalitarianism while recognizing the importance of economic development as a means to achieve common prosperity. The Confucian emphasis on production over commerce has also contributed to China’s physiocratic tradition, favoring agriculture and manufacturing over speculative capitalism—which often leads to cyclical recession, economic hollowing, corruption, inequality, and systemic collapse (see Mammonism).

Another influential Confucian concept is the Doctrine of the Mean, advocating for moderation and harmony. Confucius believed that harmony is the fundamental law of nature, with moderation leading to harmony and excess leading to disharmony. He regarded gentleness, kindness, respect, frugality, humility, impartiality, and the avoidance of extremes as essential qualities of a 君子—a person of high moral character. Deviation from the Doctrine of the Mean, he warned, could lead to disastrous consequences (see Meeting in the Middle).

This Confucian proposition stands in contrast to Western liberalism and individualism. The Chinese, lacking the arrogant, extreme, and aggressive spirit found in certain Western ideologies, have Confucianism to thank for their disposition. The emphasis on moderation, balance, and harmony has discouraged the Chinese from engaging in Western-style partisan politics, which often fosters division, conflict, hostility, and polarization. While Western culture prioritizes individualism, partisanship, and competition, Chinese culture values collectivism, unity, and cooperation. Chinese perspectives tend to approach issues in a holistic, comprehensive, and balanced manner. Contemporary Chinese leadership acknowledges that both morality and personal freedom are vital, recognizing that an excessive focus on either can be detrimental. An overemphasis on morality can stifle initiative and creativity, while excessive individual liberty can deepen conflict and inequality. However, striking this balance remains a complex challenge. Historically, Confucian morality was transformed by Neo-Confucians into a rigid ideology that limited personal freedoms. In contrast, Western liberalism and individualism represent the opposite extreme. The Chinese today strive to find a workable balance that respects individual freedom while upholding social morality (see Pluralism vs. Monism).

The peaceful life of the Chinese came to an abrupt end in 1840, when Western powers forced open China's doors through the use of opium, warships, and guns, compelling the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), the last imperial dynasty, to sign a series of unequal treaties conceding territories and indemnities. Faced with this humiliating defeat and the stark contrast between an agrarian China and the already industrialized West, Chinese people began seeking solutions to save their country. Over the eight decades following the Opium War, various attempts were made: the Self-Strengthening Movement (1861–1895), which aimed to develop China's industry and modernize its armies and navies; the Reform Movement of 1898, which sought to overhaul the imperial system through constitutional monarchy; and the Revolution of 1911, which ultimately overthrew the monarchy. Despite these efforts, none succeeded in saving China. The exploitation by Western powers, compounded by chaotic power struggles among domestic warlords after the monarchy's collapse, drained China's resources. Once the richest country in the world, China was reduced to one of the poorest.

Having exhausted all reform solutions, some Chinese intellectuals began to conclude that the root of China’s struggles lay in its own culture. In 1919, the radical May Fourth New Culture Movement emerged. In a desperate bid for solutions, some intellectuals blamed Confucianism, especially Neo-Confucianism, for China's failures, accusing it of stifling individual freedom and social progress. They advocated for dismantling Confucianism and replacing it with Western-style liberal democracy and capitalism. Others, however, were skeptical of this path and turned to another Western ideology—Marxism—believing it resonated more closely with the Confucian ideal of an egalitarian and harmonious society. This ideological divide culminated in a confrontation between the KMT and the CCP. Ultimately, the side enjoying popular support prevailed, while the KMT retreated to the island of Taiwan across the Taiwan Strait.

In the first three decades following the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, the Chinese, while facing a blockade by Western powers, laid much groundwork for future development, including land reform, women's liberation, universal free education and healthcare, and building basic industrial infrastructure. Many lessons were learned through trial and error. In 1978, under Deng Xiaoping's leadership, the CCP reassessed the lessons of the previous thirty years and resolved to implement reform and opening-up policies. This initiative aimed to harness people's potential by introducing market mechanisms into the Chinese economy while maintaining the structural advantages of its socialist framework.

The results of this strategy are evident. In just 40 years, China has transformed from a poor and weak country into the world's second-largest economy, achieving a 42-fold increase in GDP. It has become the largest manufacturing powerhouse globally, lifted 770 million people out of poverty, created a middle class of over 400 million, and increased per capita income by 23 times. Additionally, the average life expectancy in China now exceeds that of the United States. China has also emerged as the world's largest investment market, largest consumer market, and largest trading partner with more than 130 countries, playing an increasingly significant role in the global economy and international affairs. In stark contrast to some Western powers that engage in hegemonism, bullying, intervention, and subversion, China’s foreign policies adhere firmly to five guiding principles of international relations: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression, non-interference in internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. These principles are bolstered by China's Belt and Road Initiative for global common prosperity and its push for a community with a shared future for mankind. Such foreign policies reflect clear Confucian influences and are gaining increasing support globally.

Once again, China has entered an era of prosperity, and it achieved this not through aggression, colonization, conquest, or plundering other nations, but by guiding its own people to work hard and fostering cooperation with other countries for mutually beneficial outcomes. This remarkable achievement has restored the Chinese people's confidence in their philosophy, culture, system, and chosen path. The core values of Chinese civilization, as embodied in Confucianism, have been integral to this success. Without these values, socialism with Chinese characteristics and Chinese-style modernization—a unique form of modernization emphasizing civilized values, equality, justice, common prosperity, a green economy, peaceful development, and international cooperation—would not have been achievable.

Confucianism embodies the accumulated wisdom of the Chinese people, highlighting the unity, balance, and harmony between humanity and nature, individuals and society, law and virtue, morality and economy, rulers and the people, as well as among individuals themselves. Through its holistic vision, idealism, magnanimity, and positive outlook, Confucianism has served both as a unifying force and a reservoir of strength for the Chinese people, inspiring them to continually improve themselves and their country, thereby granting China its competitive edge. Though Confucianism must adapt to changing times, as it has done throughout history, it remains deeply ingrained in the language, culture, mindset, behavior, and consciousness of the Chinese people. For more than two millennia, Confucianism has been repeatedly tested, enriched, and replenished by successive generations of Chinese. Undoubtedly, it will continue to influence their pursuit of a brighter future. (See Darwinism and Confucianism.)

Lessons from Tango

Zoom out to see the larger picture, or zoom in to see only yourself — the outcomes are different.

Become one with your partner, or remain alone in your own world — the outcomes are different.

Think from your partner’s perspective, or think only of yourself — the outcomes are different.

Strive for shared well-being, or chase personal success — the outcomes are different.

Find common ground, or focus on differences — the outcomes are different.

Foster cooperation, or fuel conflict — the outcomes are different.

Show flexibility, or cling to rigidity — the outcomes are different.

Compromise and adapt, or insist and resist — the outcomes are different.

Meet halfway, or assert yourself — the outcomes are different.

Seek balance, or pursue extremes — the outcomes are different.

Maintain harmony, or pursue dominance — the outcomes are different.

Choose humility, or embrace hubris — the outcomes are different.

Act with empathy, or act with aloofness — the outcomes are different.

Be magnanimous, or be petty — the outcomes are different.

Forgive, or hold grudges — the outcomes are different.

The first path reflects the nobility of human nature; the second reveals its smallness.

The former — aligned with the spirit of tango — brings peace, cohesion, and beauty.

The latter — rooted in ego and isolation — breeds tension, division, and dissonance.

Pluralism vs. Monism

Pluralism holds that the universe consists of discrete, self-contained entities, each possessing its own independent essence. Monism, by contrast, maintains that what appear to be separate elements are in fact interconnected expressions of a single, unified reality grounded in an underlying coherence. Where pluralism foregrounds diversity and differentiation, monism emphasizes unity and interdependence. These opposing metaphysical views reflect broader intellectual traditions: pluralism aligns with the atomistic, analytical orientation of Western thought, while monism resonates with the holistic, integrative philosophies long cultivated in the East.

At the social and political level, pluralism champions individual distinction, self-determination, personal liberty, individual rights, private ownership, competition, and free-market economics. Monism, on the other hand, conceives of individuals as interrelated members of a larger social organism, prioritizing communal interests, cooperation, equality, fraternity, social responsibility, and collective well-being. These philosophical paradigms have profoundly shaped economic systems, political institutions, and social values across civilizations. The central question, however, remains unresolved: which worldview better serves humanity’s long-term interests and leads toward a sustainable and flourishing future?

Aristotle famously observed that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” For much of human history, monistic thinking prevailed, as early societies intuitively understood that unity and cooperation were essential for survival. With the rise of modern science, technology, and industrialization, individuals gained unprecedented autonomy, fostering self-reliance and accelerating a shift toward individualism and pluralism. These developments elevated personal liberty and diversity, contributing to the emergence of multiculturalism and the embrace of nonconformity, including LGBTQ+ rights, same-sex marriage, and other iconoclastic values. At the same time, these trends have been accompanied by broader philosophical shifts: relativism, which blurs distinctions between truth and falsehood, right and wrong, or beauty and ugliness; skepticism toward intellectual authority, reason, and even science; and policy frameworks such as affirmative action aimed at redressing historical inequities. While these developments have expanded inclusion and stimulated creativity, they have also intensified social fragmentation, eroded shared moral standards, and fueled ideological polarization, partisan conflict, and civic decline (see Tango and Individualism).

Rooted in a Darwinian logic of competition and survival of the fittest, individualism and pluralism often neglect the values of equality, morality, and the common good. The result has been growing social instability—not only within societies that champion these ideologies but also globally. This is evident in the moral decay, political dysfunction, and rising lawlessness within the United States, the erosion of integrity among its political elites, and the destabilizing effects of its hegemonic and coercive foreign policies abroad (see Darwinism and Confucianism).

At their core, these ideologies overlook a fundamental truth: human beings are inherently interconnected and interdependent. Our survival and progress depend on solidarity and cooperation. A healthy society must be grounded in philosophies that cultivate cohesion, shared moral principles, social stability, and effective governance. When individuals are set against one another in relentless pursuit of personal gain, division and hostility inevitably follow.

This pattern is evident in the aftermath of many U.S.-led interventions carried out in the name of “liberation,” which have frequently produced domestic instability, humanitarian crises, and mass displacement. These consequences are further compounded by open-border policies and the growing challenges of multicultural integration at home. If radical liberalism continues to advance—privileging absolute personal freedom over collective responsibility, rejecting all authority as oppressive, framing democracy as “the tyranny of the majority,” intensifying gender antagonisms, politicizing education, media, and law, and fragmenting society into ever-narrower identity groups—the social fabric will continue to unravel.

To be clear, liberalism has historically played a vital role in unlocking human potential and enabling capitalism’s rise in the West. Yet its excessive emphasis on individualism has increasingly become counterproductive. As one perceptive reader noted: “Freedom and human rights movements have placed an intensified focus on individuality. This inflated sense of self diminishes our ability to perceive the world as a unified whole and may underlie many modern psychological struggles—loneliness, depression, and mental distress. If we can zoom out and recognize ourselves as small parts of a vast universe, a fact unchanged since the Big Bang, we may rediscover the beauty of ancient natural laws and adopt a healthier perspective on ourselves and the world” (see A Wise Voice).

Although freedom is a legitimate human aspiration, radical liberalism has paradoxically resulted in the reconcentration of wealth, resources, and political power in the hands of a few—no longer under monarchies or aristocracies, but under the guise of free competition.

Observing the West’s historical success, the East—while remaining rooted in holistic philosophy and Confucian ethics—has increasingly encouraged human initiative and creativity, producing remarkable gains in recent decades. While the East has selectively integrated Western strengths, the West has largely refused to learn from the East, clinging to the belief that its past success validates its ideological supremacy. Rather than confronting its structural and moral contradictions, it has doubled down on neoliberalism. Enormous resources are devoted to media propaganda, NGOs, military expansion, and cognitive, trade, technological, and financial warfare to preserve its system and impose its values globally. This reaction is understandable given that capitalism has a vested interest in sustaining these ideologies—without them, plutocracy risks losing its legitimacy (see Democracy vs. Plutocracy).

Yet the global balance of power is shifting. While the pluralistic West once held clear advantages, the monistic East—having integrated Western strengths—has rapidly closed the gap and, in many areas, surpassed it. Individuality and sociality are both intrinsic dimensions of human nature and must be held in balance. Neither authoritarianism, which suppresses individual freedom, nor individualism, which denies humanity’s shared destiny and interdependence, can sustain a cohesive society. A successful society is built on fraternity, solidarity, cooperation, and a willingness to subordinate narrow self-interest to collective purpose. This is how families function (see Tango and Family Values). This is how tango is danced. This is how China has grown strong. And this is how America can regain its strength.

In this context, tango offers a powerful counterpoint to modern individualism. It reminds us that we are not isolated actors but participants in an intimate, responsive human partnership. Through its emphasis on mutual accommodation, trust, and cooperation, tango reveals a profound truth: genuine progress arises not from competition, but from collaboration. In this sense, tango confirms that equality, cooperation, mutual benefit, and sharing are not merely aesthetic ideals, but the true foundations of a better world (see Understanding China: Philosophies That Separate Two Worlds).

Meeting in the Middle

For many, life is good. For many others, it is not. We all live in our own reality, shaped by unique experiences and perceptions. These differing perspectives lead us to adopt opposing positions—supporters versus opponents, liberals versus conservatives, reformers versus traditionalists, Democrats versus Republicans, and so on. Yet, as Guy de Maupassant wrote in his 1883 novel A Woman’s Life, “Life is never as good or as bad as one thinks.”

René Descartes famously declared, “I think, therefore I am” (Discourse on the Method). Human cognition is shaped by personal experiences and, as a result, tends to be partial and biased. In actuality, truth often lies somewhere between opposing views. This is why Confucius advocated for the doctrine of the mean—meeting in the middle—a principle of balance and moderation. Impartiality, avoiding extremes and seeking common ground, he believed, are the mark of a true gentleman (see Understanding China: Geography, Confucianism, and Chinese-Style Modernization).

Meeting in the middle is not only a method of thinking or an approach to life; it is also a civilized way to resolve conflicts. When opposing parties insist on their own terms, they inevitably reach a stalemate. But if both are willing to meet halfway, division gives way to dialogue. Compromise may not fully satisfy either party, but it creates a shared foundation for progress. This is, in fact, how nature itself evolves. The black tulip, as described by Alexandre Dumas in his 1850 novel The Black Tulip, did not emerge from its parent plants overnight but through generations of adaptation and refinement—a process of compromise.

Politicians often seek sweeping, once-and-for-all solutions, but real progress is gradual. Every compromise, however small, is a step forward. While no one may get everything they want, everyone benefits when we move forward together—by meeting in the middle.

What results can be something far greater. As Aristotle said, “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” When individuals unite, they create outcomes far beyond their isolated contributions. A single stick breaks easily, but a bundle bound together is nearly unbreakable. In logical terms, the whole is a sufficient condition for its parts—but not the other way around. What benefits society as a whole benefits each individual; what benefits only the individual does not necessarily benefit society.

Individualism as an ideology is fundamentally flawed and as a political theory is anti-democratic. It aligns with the law of the jungle rather than the ideals of democracy (see Tango and Individualism). Those who insist solely on their own way, ignoring the needs of others, act not as citizens of a democracy but as autocrats. A democracy made up of such individuals cannot endure, as evidenced by the growing polarization, obstinacy, extremism, hostility, aggression, lack of restraint, uncooperativeness, and lawlessness in American society.

If we still hold that “all men are created equal” as a self-evident truth, if we still believe that a united and harmonious society serves the best interest of all, if we recognize our interdependence and the need for each other, and if we wish not to be disregarded by others—then we must consider others and not insist on having our own way.

Democracy is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people—not for the most forceful individuals. It relies on cooperation, not antagonism. It seeks balance, harmony, and the well-being of all, not the self-interest of a few. Democracy embodies the Golden Mean, not the law of the jungle. It requires that we resolve conflict through compromise, not through power or force. A democracy must educate its people on its principles.

If we truly believe in these democratic ideals, then meeting in the middle is not only sensible and civil—it is essential. It is the path of democracy—and the spirit of tango. Sadly, at present, we seem to be struggling—both in our politics and in our dance.