When Imperial China Had a Vietnamese Prime Minister: The Surprising Origins of Meritocracy—And Why It Outperforms the West More Than Ever
Long before the West imagined equal opportunity, China practiced it. The Tang civil service offers lessons for a world torn between Chinese meritocracy and Western plutocracy.
(Illustration by Felix Abt)
Harmony Over Conquest: The Chinese Governance Ethos Explained
Over 2,000 years ago, Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War that the highest form of strategy was to “subdue the enemy without fighting.” This ethos reflects a fundamental truth: the Chinese political tradition values harmony and competence over domination and dogma. Unlike the missionary zeal often seen in Western foreign policy, China’s concept of Tianxia — “All Under Heaven” — envisions a world governed through moral example, not conquest.
Professor Daniel A. Bell emphasizes that this principle of harmony (hé, 和) extends beyond philosophy into practical governance. It is not about uniformity, but about reconciling diverse interests peacefully, both domestically and internationally.
Canadian scholar Daniel A. Bell is a prominent expert on Chinese political thought and contemporary governance, best known for his work on Confucianism and political meritocracy. He has taught at leading institutions, including Tsinghua University, and is widely regarded for his nuanced, context-rich interpretations of China’s political system.The Secret to China’s Longevity: A System Built on Merit
If China has endured and thrived for millennia, it is not by accident. Its survival owes much to a unique political architecture rooted in meritocracy — a concept formalized during the Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) but inspired by Confucius centuries earlier. While aristocratic Europe still clung to bloodlines, China developed a bureaucracy that judged candidates by knowledge, ethics, and performance.
The Tang’s imperial examination system, or Keju, allowed anyone — including peasants, foreigners, and even women in rare cases — to rise based on merit. This wasn’t an abstract ideal. A recent peer-reviewed study of epitaphs from Tang elites found that elite lineage had virtually no effect on success in the exam. In terms of social mobility, Tang China resembled 1960s America — a time when the American Dream was still somewhat real.
Daniel Bell describes the evolution of the Chinese governing system as “political meritocracy.” While many officials at the local level are democratically elected from a pool of diverse candidates, leaders at higher levels are selected through a rigorous process that assesses their competence, moral character, and performance across multiple prior roles. The result is a leadership cadre equipped to address complex challenges in economics, technology, and sustainability— a modern echo of the Tang-era ethos, adapted to the demands of the present.
Definition of Meritocracy by Wikipedia (Screenshot Wikipedia)
Foreign Prime Ministers, Female Innovators, and Confucian Feminism
Among the system’s remarkable outcomes: Khương Công Phụ, a Vietnamese scholar, rose to become Prime Minister of China. Japanese prince Abe no Nakamaro and Korean philosopher Choe Chiwon also passed the imperial exams and held high office.
The system itself was formalized under Wu Zetian, China’s only female emperor — a powerful testament to women’s intellectual potential, even in an era when the bureaucracy remained entirely male-dominated. This legacy continues to have an impact today, as women increasingly assume leadership positions within Chinese institutions.
Perhaps this, too, reflects a deeper historical continuity: more than four millennia ago, a female-led society in ancient China flourished for over ten generations (about 250 years). Located in Fujia, Shandong province, it is the oldest known matrilineal society in the world, as revealed by DNA and radiocarbon dating published in Nature.
Confucius and Plato: A Tale of Two Meritocracies
Confucius envisioned a society where ability and virtue — not birth — determined leadership. Plato, who lived 150 years later, also promoted a meritocratic ideal, but retained hereditary privilege in his political vision. Confucius rejected hereditary rule, recognizing its tendency to breed corruption, decadence, and dynastic collapse — a cycle he sought to break through education and moral leadership.
He called for rulers to be practical, generous, and just — people-centered in the truest sense. He famously declared: “In education, there should be no class distinctions” (Analects, 15.39). And he insisted that trust — not force — is the foundation of any legitimate government. If something must be sacrificed, he said: abandon the army before the grain, and the grain before trust.
Bell highlights that Confucian emphasis on moral leadership and long-term planning still informs contemporary Chinese governance. Decisions are made with the future in mind, not merely for electoral cycles or short-term gain.
A Model That Inspired the Enlightenment — and Alarmed the British Aristocracy
China’s examination system influenced European modernity. The British adopted it for their colonial administration in India in 1832, then for their own civil service in 1846 — much to the horror of the nobility, who saw their grip on government slipping.
Thinkers like Voltaire were openly inspired by China’s governance. He translated Chinese plays and lauded Confucian values for their rationality and moral clarity. A statue of Confucius even graces the U.S. Supreme Court building, alongside Moses and Solon — representing the foundational thinkers of the world’s great legal traditions.
Meritocracy vs. Plutocracy: A Tale of Two Systems
China’s modern examination system, the Gaokao, continues the legacy of the historic Keju, ensuring that entry into elite institutions like Tsinghua University — which trains many of the country’s top leaders — is fiercely competitive. Out of 10 million high school graduates each year, only 3,000 secure admission.
Professor John L. Thornton, former Chairman of Goldman Sachs Asia, who over the course of his career also met numerous leading Chinese politicians, explains it as follows:
“The CCP functions more like a meritocratic elite than a traditional party — akin to the historical mandarin class. It’s performance-based, much like the U.S. military.”
Thornton emphasizes that only the most capable individuals ascend within the party and government. In contrast, Western political systems increasingly rely on billionaire-funded campaigns, media narratives shaped by elite interests, and a declining trust in democratic institutions. As the voices of the dwindling middle class grow quieter, governance in the West is drifting toward oligarchy and away from true democracy.
While most political leaders in the West come from backgrounds in law and finance, China’s leadership is largely composed of capable engineers and scientists, builders of things rather than administrators of things.
David Bell underscores that China’s system blends meritocracy with limited local democratic mechanisms. Mid-level governance experiments allow officials to be tested on multiple criteria, such as economic performance, poverty reduction, and environmental sustainability. This ensures that leaders are genuinely competent and adaptable.
While most political leaders in the West come from backgrounds in law and finance, China’s leadership is dominated by engineers and scientists — individuals who rose through a meritocratic system that selects for competence and are trained to build, solve, and innovate rather than merely administer. (Screenshot: Wall Street Journal headline)The Role of the Communist Party Explained
In the West, political legitimacy comes from noisy elections, charisma, and fundraising; anyone can rise quickly with the right media moment. China allows elections for village committees (村委会) and, in some cases, township-level positions. Residents can directly vote for representatives in their village or neighborhood, casting ballots for the candidates.
These low-level representatives can then advance through a quiet, corporate-like system run by the Communist Party’s Organization Department—an enormous HR apparatus that manages millions of officials through data-driven performance reviews rather than public elections. Over decades, leaders climb a strict 30-year ladder from village posts to provincial leadership, overseeing populations the size of entire countries, and are evaluated on hard metrics such as GDP growth, social stability, and environmental targets.
This system cultivates experienced technocrats and protects governance from populism, but it also fosters conformity, risk-aversion, and past abuses linked to narrowly focused KPIs. China’s governance is not a personal dictatorship, as often portrayed in Western propaganda narratives, but an institutional, meritocratic leadership system grounded in “performance legitimacy”: the Party’s authority relies on its ability to deliver tangible improvements in citizens’ lives.
The system is highly efficient at addressing known problems but has struggled in the past with creativity and disruptive innovation. Western observers often misread China as fragile or primitive, but in reality, it functions more like a powerful, meritocratic corporation playing a long-term strategic game.
In this context, it is important to emphasize that criticism is permitted, while defamation is prohibited and punishable under Chinese law. This applies to everyone—from ordinary citizens insulting one another to individuals making false accusations against Chinese leaders. Yet Western narratives often distort this fact and portray it as particularly “dangerous” to criticize Chinese leaders, while overlooking the broader legal framework.
Today, the competition between the United States and China is no longer just economic or geopolitical — it has evolved into a clash between plutocracy and meritocracy, with profound implications for the future of global leadership.
Resilience Through Reinvention
China is shifting away from its overheated real estate sector, redirecting investment toward high-value manufacturing, AI, and green energy. While Western analysts call this pivot “risky,” it reflects a long-term vision for sustainability. In China’s meritocratic system, leaders are cultivated to think strategically and plan for the future — rather than merely until the next election cycle.
Even Elon Musk, who once mocked Chinese carmakers in a 2011 Bloomberg interview, recently admitted:
“Chinese car companies are the most competitive in the world… If no trade barriers are put in place, they’ll demolish most competitors.”
Western Mockery, Eastern Ingenuity
When China cracked down on its bloated private tutoring industry, Western media accused it of stifling opportunity. But David P. Goldman, a U.S. expert on China, praised its rigorous public education and digital regulations aimed at curbing youth addiction and inequality. Children under 8 in China are limited to 40 minutes a day of supervised screen time — a far cry from laissez-faire digital chaos in the West.
As China improves education for all, wealthy elites who move their children abroad are making space for motivated students from modest backgrounds. Confucius would approve.
Professor Bell further notes that China’s rise is driven by both historical-cultural values — such as long-term planning and state responsibility for poverty alleviation — and modern policy frameworks that incentivize officials while promoting economic liberalization. This combination has produced sustained, inclusive growth without resorting to coercion abroad.
Why Meritocracy Is a Global Imperative
While China reinforces its social contract through education and competence, the West grapples with democratic decline. Political leaders are often selected not for their wisdom but for their charisma, wealth, or populist appeal — and, most critically, their allegiance to the interests of elite donors. Meanwhile, rising inequality and eroding public trust signal a system in distress.
As Confucius warned: “A government without trust cannot stand.”
The lesson from China’s Confucian model is clear: meritocracy is not just an ancient ideal — it is a modern necessity. Professor Bell emphasizes that China’s governance is context-dependent, historically rooted, and oriented toward long-term, non-violent, and mutually beneficial outcomes. Western concerns often stem from a misunderstanding of this political philosophy and its cultural context, as well as from projecting their own values, which differ from those in China.
If the West hopes to reverse its decline, it must restore its commitment to competence, character, and equity in public life. Whether the ruling oligarchs will allow it is another matter entirely.
▪ ▪ ▪
Read my related articles addressing Western stereotypes of China:
Why India Can’t Catch Up to China—Yet
Rapid growth hasn’t closed the gap, but strategic partnerships could give India a turbo boost
China’s Shadow Banking Paradox: The System Everyone Fears—but Without Which China Cannot Live
It’s the massive ticking bomb that everyone can see. Yet, somehow, it hasn’t exploded.
The Quiet Rise of a New Global Payments System
BRICS, CIPS, and the gradual end of the dominance of the US dollar – a fundamental change that the West apparently overlooks – to its own detriment.
Revelation Story: How Germany and Japan Tried to Derail China’s High-Speed Rail Rise
A behind-the-scenes look at sabotage, supply blockades, and how China turned crisis into technological independence.
Inside the Secret Battle Between a Rising China and a Declining Superpower
Past the Propaganda: Xinjiang as It Really Is
An on-the-ground account challenging stereotypes — meeting Uyghurs, experiencing traditions, and seeing a region beyond the narrative
The Collapse of the “China Collapse” Narrative
I spent several weeks in China, expecting to find signs of a current or impending crisis. Instead, I witnessed a future taking shape at breakneck speed.
Rerouting Global Trade: The Rise of the Eurasian Corridor
Bypassing US Maritime Chokepoints Through Steel and Strategy
China’s Breakthroughs Are Ending Diseases—And Threatening Big Pharma’s Business Model
Meritocracy and shared prosperity drive innovations that Western healthcare systems can’t match.
Oligarchic Rule in the West Contrasts with People’s Representation in Vietnam and China
Vietnam and China Expose the Rot at the Heart of Western “Democracy”
From Guerrilla Wars to Victory Parades: Why China, Russia, and North Korea Stand Together Today
The forgotten role of Chinese and Korean resistance in WWII explains today’s alliances—and why the West keeps misreading them.
China’s Silent Checkmate: How Rare Earths Are Crippling Israel’s Missile Defense
Iran’s missiles are flying. Israel’s interceptors are dwindling. But the real game-changer? China’s hold on rare earths.
Debunking the Myth of China’s “Social Credit” Dystopia
Behind the West’s most persistent political fantasies — and why the truth is more bureaucratic than Orwellian.
Two Competing Systems: China’s Subways Serve People — Western Subways Fail Them
Subways Don’t Lie: China Rising, West Declining
Revelation: Repressive China Suppressed A Popular Toy Bear — Or Was It the Western Fake News Media?
How the Media Misuse Sport as a Propaganda Weapon in the Information Warfare
Western Media Rely on Dubious Sources in Smears Directed Against China
▪ ▪ ▪
This article was first published by the Asian internet magazine Eastern Angle.