Political Meritocracy Based on Public Reason

Daniel A. Bell’s book “The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy” presents an argument for a Chinese Model different from Western liberal democracy to explain the changes and developments in Chinese political reform. The aim of the China Model is to select and promote leaders with superior ability and virtue to serve as officials, specifically expressed as a version of “vertical model of democratic meritocracy,” with democracy at the bottom, experimentation in the middle, and meritocracy at the top. Some scholars have criticized this based on the legitimacy crisis and practical defects of political meritocracy. In response to these criticisms, I believe that Rawls’ concept of public reason could be used to improve political meritocracy. Based on its legitimacy dilemma, the substantive content of public reason provides fundamental guidance for exercising political power, expressing equal respect for free citizens, and providing normative explanations for the legitimacy status of political meritocracy; procedural rules of public reason require deliberative democracy at the top level to facilitate the expression of diverse interests and maximize social consensus; and based on risks such as system ossification and corruption, exclusive view of public reason provides external constraints on government officials. Therefore, a form of political meritocracy based on public reason offers a logical response to academic criticisms regarding political meritocracy and represents a modern understanding of Confucianism-based political meritocracy focused on the well-being of individuals.