VOLUME III, SEMESTER 4, CHAPTER 48, SECTION 3
The Foundation Supports the Superstructure, Not Determines Everything
The previous section acknowledged merit and pointed out the origin. One last matter remains: two words in that plain-spoken line must be taken out separately to be looked at. Those two words are determines. In the line "The economic base determines the superstructure," these two words determines are used too absolutely. What this section aims to do is replace these two words with a word closer to reality. After the replacement, it will be found that the line not only does not collapse, but stands even firmer. This is not refuting it, but loosening a word that was too absolute on its behalf.
One, the two words "determines" are spoken too absolutely
Determines means whatever is down below, what is up top must be the exact same—a one-to-one correspondence with no second possibility. If it were truly like this, then merely by seeing clearly how people in a place eat, work, and divide things, one could deduce its laws, rules, and societal tone line by line, without a single line missing or even a detail being wrong.
Shining light on facts reveals it is not so. The easiest way to shine light is to find two places where that layer down below is almost identical, and see whether their layer up top is also identical. Such examples need not be sought far away; they exist right inside a single factory.
That chair factory had two workshops using the exact same batch of machines, the same pay scale, the same evaluation, and the same materials—even the work was assigned down from the same batch of orders. Yet these two workshops looked entirely different. In one workshop, master craftsmen were willing to teach their bottom-drawer techniques to apprentices, and when defective items occurred, someone would step forward on their own to say this item is mine, while during shift handovers, the previous shift would conveniently wipe down the machines; in the other workshop, no one was willing to say an extra word, and when trouble arose, people first looked at whose responsibility it was, while during shift handovers, that bit of iron filings on the machines was left as usual for the next shift to clean up.
That layer down below was identical, yet that layer up top differed so widely. What differed? It could not be found on the pay scale, nor on the evaluation sheet. It was mostly how those two or three leading figures acted in ordinary times, and that tone accumulated bit by bit over those few years. Chapter 43 spoke of this layer: the exact same mechanism, landing in two places, runs out into two entirely different results.
Two, so the word that ought to be used is "supports"
Since it is not determines, which word ought to be used? This book set uses supports. The meaning of supports is very solid and easy to understand: without it, the top cannot stand; with it, what shape the top grows into remains unset. A house is easiest to understand. If the foundation is not solid, the building surely collapses—this end is fixed, with no room for bargaining. Yet once the foundation is solid, how many stories are built up top, how many windows are opened, which side the door faces, how people live inside the house, and whether they live harmoniously—the foundation cannot manage a single word of it. What the foundation manages is whether it can stand, not what shape it grows into.
That layer down below and that layer up top share this exact relationship. If grain stores are not full, rules and manners surely cannot be kept—this end is fixed; once grain stores are full, what kind of rules and tone will grow out of that place, and whether people meeting each other are polite or guarded—this end is alive, unset, and impossible to be set.
Replacing determines with supports, that line becomes: the economic base supports the superstructure. It loses a degree of absolute finality and gains a degree of standing firm. Moreover, it aligns even closer with Guan Zhong's twelve characters: Guan Zhong said, "When the grain stores are full, then they know rules and manners." He used then, not must; he meant only with the former can the latter be spoken of, not that with the former, the latter comes automatically.
Three, the difference of two words lies in whether a person still has leeway
Is this single word exchange worth it? Worth it, and the difference is huge, differing on a matter of utmost weight: whether a person still has leeway. If it is determines, then where a person is born, in what kind of family, and how he thinks, acts, and what kind of person he becomes in his lifetime are largely fixed. His own mind, his hesitation, and his choice would merely be a shadow pushed out by that layer down below, counting for nothing. According to this saying, that person who divided his last half-bag of rice with a neighbor in a year of famine becomes an inexplicable matter.
If it is supports, that sentence changes: whether the ground is solid governs whether he can stand firm; where to walk after standing firm—he still has his own mind. Section 1 stated that the reason that half-bag of rice commands respect is precisely because he did an extra thing he could originally have chosen not to do when the ground was not solid.
Chapter 41 set a line: position is not identity. This section raises that line one layer higher. What that layer down below gives is position, not a verdict; it places a person at a certain spot, but it has not finished speaking for him, nor walked the road for him.
This is also precisely why this entire book set refuses to use that absolute word. Used absolutely, a person becomes a thing pushed along; replaced with supports, a person still stands there and must walk on his own.
Four, another end: the superstructure pulls back on the foundation
Replacing determines with supports also brings out another matter blocked by those two words: these two layers are not one-way. The very first rule set in the first semester was: check and balance is two-way. This rule works here all the same. The bottom holds up the top, and the top turns back to modify the bottom.
The clearest example is those children. They were originally down in the mine shafts, pushed in by that layer down below: the mine needed people, small bodies could squeeze into those narrow shafts, and wages were cheap—the pay for one adult could hire three. Later, a single sheet of law pulled them out. Law is a thing of that layer up top, yet once it went down, the practice of that layer down below had to change accordingly: the mine had to find other ways, hire more adults, add machinery, and widen those narrow shafts.
Look again at the two walls spoken of in Chapter 47. Once an order went down permitting only those few firms to do that business, that wall was built up; once another document went down stating that wall's time limit was reached, the road opened. A single line from that layer up top can make the chessboard of that layer down below larger or smaller; once the chessboard changes, the measure of those four scales down below changes right along with it.
So these two layers are locked into each other. Chapter 47 stated that the first path of check and balance is that people can still speak, and that table enabling both ends to speak was precisely provided by that layer up top. Without that table down below, that quarrel two thousand one hundred years ago could not have been fought.
Five, this book set's own root cushions one more layer underneath
By here, one last layer must be added, which is also the place where this book set differs most from that plain-spoken line. After replacing determines with supports, one remaining question is unanswered: with the exact same foundation, why do different buildings grow out? In that factory's two workshops, the bottom was identical, yet the top differed so widely—what exactly was that difference?
This book set's answer is: one more layer must be cushioned underneath. Economy is the base, politics and law are the superstructure, but beneath the base lies a patch of soil, and that patch of soil is called culture. How people view whether a debt of gratitude ought to be repaid, whether taking advantage counts as decent, and whether an elderly person who can no longer move ought to be well cared for—these things are not written on the pay scale, nor in the laws; no one taught them, yet they act every day. How those leading figures act grows precisely out of this patch of soil.
So strictly speaking, the positions laid out by this book set are three layers: culture is the root, economy is the foundation, and politics and law are the superstructure. That plain-spoken line placed the relationship between the middle and the top correctly, but did not place that last layer further down. This layer will not be fully explained in this chapter; Chapter 50 will address it directly. This section merely sets the position well without stealing its words. Setting this position well lands right back on those six characters at the end of the page: what that plain-spoken line explained clearly is credited to the speaker; the part left unsaid is dug further down, digging into that patch of soil of the ancestors.
One last misunderstanding must be guarded against here: saying the foundation merely supports does not mean that layer down below is unimportant and can be ignored. Quite on the contrary, precisely because it manages only the single matter of whether things can stand firm, this single matter must be accomplished. The foundation cannot manage what shape the building is built into, but once the foundation collapses, no kind of building can be preserved. Therefore, this volume spoke of economy for four entire semesters, speaking precisely of making the foundation solid; as for what kind of life grows upon the foundation, that relies on the top two layers, as well as that patch of soil down below.
Six, what this section sets firm, as well as the conclusion of this chapter
What this section sets firm is one line: the foundation supports the superstructure, not determines everything. Supports means without it, the top cannot stand; with it, what shape the top grows into remains unset. If the foundation is not solid, the building surely collapses; if the foundation is solid, how many stories are built and how many windows are opened—the foundation cannot manage. With this single word replaced, a person still has leeway: the ground governs whether he can stand firm; where to walk after standing firm—he still has his own mind. Moreover, these two layers are locked into each other: a single sheet of law can pull children out of mine shafts, and a single order can make the chessboard smaller or larger.
Combining the three sections of this chapter: material things come first—this sequence bears no exception, yet it speaks of order, not high or low; that good plain-spoken line is accepted all the same, yet the sequence it spoke of was set by Guan Zhong two thousand four hundred years earlier; and its word determines was used too absolutely—replaced with supports, it stands firm, while that patch of soil called culture must be cushioned further underneath.
With the relationship between foundation and superstructure set firm, a very solid question follows: where is the boundary between these two layers? Where do the end managing money and the end managing orders each stop? The next chapter speaks of this, speaking still of that line from the ancestors: He who is not in that position does not meddle in its governance.
Credit to the ancestors; the mistakes are mine: Tiger Lyon.
Chapter 49: He Who Does Not Hold the Position Does Not Plan Its Policies