Book Projects

Holistic Dynamism: A Chinese Conception of the State (in progress)

Within the history of political thought and political theory, it is standard to see liberal principles and social contract theory as the only effective means of producing limited government. In Holistic Dynamism: A Chinese Conception of the State, I propose a different solution. Taking inspiration from Chinese political thought, I defend a non-liberal theory of limited government rooted in an organicist conception of state authority. This is a theory in which the state is envisioned as a holistic, dynamic entity—one that is meant to care for the well-being of its people and citizens, while also allowing for the independence and autonomy of its internal institutions. Such a state is attentive to the problems of private power hierarchies yet restrained enough not to override the autonomy of its institutions or individual citizens. At the same time, this state retains the capacity to combat private power based on the organicist conception of it as a concrete person that prioritizes the benefit of its people.

Drawing on modern Chinese political thought from 1895 to the present, Holistic Dynamism engages with figures such as Liang Qichao (1873–1929), Zhang Junmai (1887–1969), Gao Yihan (1884–1968), and Luo Longji (1898–1965) as theoretical interlocutors. Employing a comparative perspective, the project examines the state both with and against Western frameworks. Rejecting Western notions of state personhood as fictive, legal, or moral entities—such as Hobbes’s Leviathan or Pufendorf’s persona moralis—this project draws insights from Chinese political thought to argue that the state should be theorized as a concrete, living person. This organismic conception endows the state with personality, agency, and will, enabling it to adapt, rejuvenate, and transform modernity’s individualistic and egoistic tendencies into what the Chinese philosopher Zhao Tingyang calls a “political ontology of coexistence.”[1] By grounding a form of limited government in the authority of the state person itself—an authority that supersedes the people—rather than in popular sovereignty or social contract theory, this approach demonstrates how different theories of sovereignty and limited government can exist and be defended without reliance on democratic ideals.

The dissertation’s argument moves through five distinct stages to articulate and defend different dimensions and moments of what I call a “holistic dynamic state,” the name I give to my vision of a non-liberal, yet still limited form of political governance. It begins by addressing foundational questions about how we should conceptualize the state, arguing for an organismic conception of the state as a concrete, non-fictive person. This view contrasts with notions of the state as an instrument, a government-equivalent, or a fictive moral entity, as well as modern accounts based on popular sovereignty and representation. Based on Chinese sources, I argue that this organismic conception offers a stronger basis for limited government, one that categorically distinguishes the state from the government. By grounding the state in its personhood, this model envisions a “democratic state” that embodies a theory of the limits of political obligation, offering a framework to hold governments accountable to their obligations toward the person of the state.

At the core of this conception lies the principle of “holistic dynamism.” Derived from Chinese moral and political thought, holistic dynamism represents a shared moral aspiration underpinning many Chinese theories of the state. It describes an integrative, adaptive approach to state agency, likening the state to a living entity that evolves and responds to challenges while reconciling individual and collective interests. Holistic dynamism simultaneously denotes a form, a requirement, and a moral aspiration of limited government power, grounded in and shaped by Chinese traditions of statehood and statecraft and theories of sagehood and harmony. The chapter demonstrates how this principle enables the state to maintain its integrity, vitality, and openness to future innovations while fostering a dynamic equilibrium between the private and public realms.

I use this framework to articulate next a theory of “holistic dynamic sovereignty,” reconceiving sovereignty as both “superordinate” and “monolithic.” The superordinate aspect views sovereignty as emerging from the interactions of diverse institutions within a polycentric structure, while the monolithic aspect emphasizes the indivisibility of authority, vested in a single agent or cohesive group. These dual aspects are unified through what I term the “harmonizing office,” a central institution that embodies the state’s will as a coherent whole while integrating contributions from its constituent parts. This conception critiques centralized, monistic notions of popular sovereignty and instead proposes a diffuse model of authority that limits governmental power—not through a social contract or democratic government—but by rooting supreme authority in the state person itself. Sovereignty, in this model, involves the ongoing task of restricting the state’s authority over its people and institutions, balancing the need for unity with the recognition of pluralism. This reconciled sovereignty addresses the violence and inequities of private power hierarchies while maintaining robust checks and balances and respecting individual autonomy.

I then offer an account of how the principle of holistic dynamism can be further concretely institutionalized and stabilized by outlining a set of institutional blueprints that illustrate what a holistic dynamic state looks like and how it differs from a traditional liberal democratic state. Through a reading of the Confucian philosopher Mou Zongsan’s concept of ziwo kanxian (self-negation), I examine holistic dynamism’s concrete capacity for self-correction and resilience in addressing specific challenges such as oligarchic capture, polarization, and emergencies that demand concentrated powers. I analyze the precise mechanisms that enable it to navigate these challenges more effectively while sustaining its moral aspirations and commitments. These test cases serve to assess whether holistic dynamism can preserve the vitality and coherence of the political community under such conditions.

Finally, the dissertation’s argument finishes by turning to the international arena, examining how holistic dynamism might contribute to international relations theory and global governance. I compare the Tianxia theory—a concept of world order rooted in the idea of “all-under-heaven”—with Carl Schmitt’s concept of Grossraum (large space). Drawing from these comparisons, I argue for a transformative vision of the state as what the Chinese thinker and reformer Liang Qichao termed a “cosmopolitan state,” echoing his call for a state capable of acting as an agent of change. This cosmopolitan state, as an embodiment of holistic dynamism, transcends entrenched nationalism and rigid nation-state structures to foster a harmonious and democratic global order. In doing so, it reimagines the roles of states within the international system, proposing a framework that balances national sovereignty with cosmopolitan aspirations.

Holistic Dynamism introduces an importantly different way of conceptualizing the state that will have significant ramifications for both political theory and the broader social sciences. I approach the concept of the state as a “bridge concept,” or what the comparative philosopher Aaron Stalnaker describes as “general ideas that guide and thematize comparative inquiry, while leaving space for greater specification in particular cases.”[2] In reconstructing a set of debates surrounding the emergence of the concept of the state within East Asian political thought, the dissertation seeks both to expose and overcome the limitations of Western theoretical tendencies. It also enriches contemporary political and legal thought by presenting an organicist theory of the state that is rooted in different conceptions of political agency and ontology from West-centric accounts. More specifically, Holistic Dynamism attempts to think about the state outside the liberal and methodological individualist frame by envisioning a concrete, dynamic, and adaptable state-person that, far from becoming an authoritarian collective, decisively and effectively protects citizens’ interests as part of its own body while advancing the ends of peace and justice. In doing so, this account places itself into direct conversation with Western canonical state theorists such as Thomas Hobbes, G.W.F Hegel, Otto von Gierke, and Carl Schmitt, as well as contemporary theorists such as Philip Pettit and Quentin Skinner. This framework redefines inter-state relations as interactions between concrete, ethical persons, infusing treaties and alliances with deeper responsibility and obligation. It also creates space for new moral and legal frameworks to address pressing issues such as the security dilemma, sovereign debt, populism, authoritarianism, and the elite capture of the state apparatus.

[1] Tingyang Zhao, All under Heaven: The Tianxia System for a Possible World Order, trans. Joseph E. Harroff, 1st ed., Vol. 3 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2021).

[2] Aaron Stalnaker, Overcoming Our Evil: Human Nature and Spiritual Exercises in Xunzi and Augustine (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2006).

A New State of Democracy: The Contribution of Chinese Political Thought to 21st Century State Theory (in progress)

My second book, A New State of Democracy: The Contribution of Chinese Political Thought to 21st Century State Theory, examines the possibility, merits, and disadvantages of having a democratic state without a democratic government. Like the first project, this book further engages with conceptions of the state, political representation, popular sovereignty, and democracy in modern Chinese political thought, by turning to figures such as Mou Zongsan (1909-1995), Mao Zedong (1893-1976), and Wang Hui (1959-), while conversing with contemporary democratic theory literature in the West and indigenous Chinese texts. It will do so by exploring whether a conception of the state that satisfies the principles of democratic equality, freedom, and operational differentiation can be genuinely democratic. It argues that democratic features can reside in non-governmental aspects of the state. This book, in addition, asks what may be gained and lost when differentiating a democratic state and democratic government in this way. At the same time, it raises a series of fundamental questions concerning what exactly democracy is: should it only be understood as a regime type, how exactly are state and administrative institutions related, what kinds of democracies are defensible, and, more concretely, does the current Chinese state qualify? This effort is particularly timely given the contemporary democratic crisis, which has, in turn, given renewed vigor to both populist and authoritarian movements across the globe. With this book, I hope to demonstrate that China and the West have important lessons to learn from one another if only they would be open to a more holistic understanding of democracy.

Journal Publications

 “Reimagining Reading with Chinese Political Ontology,” Philosophy & Social Criticism, forthcoming.

Abstract: This article explores two predominant conceptions of reading—the Aristotelian framework from the Western tradition and the holistic dynamic approach rooted in Chinese philosophy. The Aristotelian conception emphasizes truth-seeking, knowledge acquisition, and self-fulfillment through a linear, teleological process. In contrast, the holistic dynamic conception, informed primarily by Confucian and Daoist texts, views reading as an ongoing, cyclical process of transformation, moral cultivation, and alignment with the broader milieu. Rather than treating these frameworks as oppositional, I propose a synthetic conception of reading that integrates both perspectives. This synthesis combines the pursuit of stable truths with the adaptability and moral cultivation central to the holistic dynamic approach. This article argues that such a combined framework offers a richer, more comprehensive understanding of reading as a practice that shapes individuals and societies alike. This approach holds significant implications for contemporary political theory, fostering more resilient and engaged political agents through transformative reading practices.

“Confucianism Embodied: An ‘Interdisciplinary’ Approach to Comparative Political Theory,” Comparative Philosophy, Volume 15, No. 2 (2024): 113-138.

Abstract: This article articulates and defends an “interdisciplinary” approach to Confucian political theory and presents Confucianism as a living, dynamic entity rather than merely a reservoir of ideas contained within a set of texts. It argues for a methodology that transcends traditional textual analysis, advocating for an intersectional approach that melds normative, emancipatory, and practical dimensions. This approach seeks to capture the evolving essence of Confucianism as influenced by cultural, institutional, and individual interactions. It also promotes a “distant reading” to examine not only texts and historical debates but also institutional changes, power dynamics, and guiding principles within Confucianized societies. The study highlights the need to recognize how Confucian ideals are manifested in real history and politics and emphasizes the importance of studying the social embodiment of the political ideas in comparative political theory.

“Hegel and China: Beyond Liberalism and Communitarianism,” Chinese Political Science Review, (2023): 1-22.

Abstract: This article explores the longstanding debate between communitarians and liberals in political philosophy, a debate that gained prominence with the publication of Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue and Michael Sandel's Liberalism and the Limits of Justice in the early 1980s. The article argues that while both sides offer valuable insights, their positions are ultimately incomplete when considered in isolation. To address this, the article proposes a higher-order theory rooted in Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's political and social philosophy, which harmonizes the claims of both individual rights and community values. Hegel’s systematic approach offers a framework that reconciles freedom with socio-political context, individuality with community, and subjectivity with objectivity. Additionally, the article highlights how Hegel’s philosophy can provide fresh insights into China’s modernization efforts by offering a more holistic and dialectical understanding of the state, civil society, and individual rights.

Working Papers and Work in Progress

“The State as a Concrete Person: An Organismic Theory with Roots in China.” Presented at the MPSA, Chicago, April 2024. (under review)

Abstract: This article articulates and defends a conception of the state informed by Chinese historical and philosophical perspectives, placing these ideas in conversation with contemporary Western political theory. Drawing on modern Chinese political thought from 1895 to the present, it reconstructs a debate from the late Qing period between those who viewed the state as a superior organismic entity with its own will and purpose (e.g., Liang Qichao, Zhang Junmai) and those who saw it as a tool for protecting individual rights (e.g., Gao Yihan, Luo Longji). Moving beyond this debate, I argue for a conception of the state as a concrete, living person with independent will, rationality, and purpose, protecting individuals as part of its body. This novel account reimagines state sovereignty and responsibility, revealing the limitations of Western approaches rooted in methodological individualism and offering a fresh perspective on international political thought, legal theory, and international politics.

“The Everlasting State: Defending the Concept of ‘Political Antifragility’ from a Chinese Perspective” (under review)

Abstract: This article articulates and defends the concept of "political antifragility" as a framework for understanding how states can thrive amidst adversity, drawing on both Chinese philosophical traditions and contemporary political theories. The core argument explores why some states collapse under stress while others flourish, focusing on the ontological elements that contribute to a state's endurance beyond economic, geographical, or cultural factors. The concept of political antifragility is proposed as a key principle that enables states to harness disorder and crises for growth and transformation. Rooted in Chinese philosophies, particularly select Daoist texts, this concept calls for greater attention in political theory to the resilience and adaptability of states.

“Benign Populism, Political Accountability, and the China Model” (under review)

Abstract: This article examines the "China Model," a political governance approach defined by Daniel A. Bell as a hybrid system combining meritocracy at the top, experimentation in the middle, and democracy at the bottom. While Bell promotes this model as a viable alternative to Western liberal democracy and extreme authoritarianism, critics like Fukuyama and Nathan warn against its potential for unchecked elite power and advocate for electoral democracy. This article argues that while these critiques raise important concerns, their proposed solutions are insufficient. Instead, it introduces a novel concept that integrates Bell's political meritocracy with insights from Machiavelli's theories on statecraft, particularly his ideas on the balance of power between elites and the populace. This integration enhances accountability, ensuring that meritocratic leaders genuinely serve the public interest. By exploring a hypothetical scenario involving a virtuous leader, the article underscores the necessity of popular checks on elite power for effective governance. This contribution advances political theory by proposing a balanced approach that combines meritocratic principles with mechanisms for democratic accountability, offering a fresh perspective on achieving public interest-driven governance without drastic regime changes.

“Beyond Activism: The Aristotle-Rawls Model for Directed Political Engagement” (under review)

Abstract: This article articulates and defends the Aristotle-Rawls model of political engagement, addressing contemporary debates about the role of political philosophers in non-ideal theory. By juxtaposing the views of Aristotle and John Rawls with those of Ben Laurence, the article outlines a conception of the philosopher as a directed educator of inclusive audiences, especially social elites. This model contrasts with activism-centered approaches like Laurence's. Through examining Aristotle's and Rawls' engagements with their respective communities, the article argues that this directed engagement model is more effective in achieving valuable political goals and meaningful change. The article aims to redefine the role of political philosophers, emphasizing their broader and more inclusive engagement as key to fostering rational discourse and just political cultures in liberal democracies.

“Belligerent Cosmopolitans: How Pre-Office Foreign Experience Influences the Conflict Behavior of Leaders” (with Xunchao Zhang, under review)

Abstract: How does pre-office experience living abroad affect leaders’ foreign policy behavior? The conventional wisdom suggests that cosmopolitan experience makes leaders more peaceful. This idea, rooted in the intergroup contact hypothesis and Kantian theory of "cosmopolitan peace," suggests that experiences abroad enhance individual understanding of foreign cultures and values, reduce intergroup prejudice, and potentially foster a cosmopolitan identity. As a result, leaders with pre-office experience abroad should initiate less military conflict. Contrary to this "cosmopolitan peace hypothesis," we argue that exposure to unfamiliar lands, institutions, and practices makes leaders more likely to initiate international conflicts while in office. Because national identity is defined in relation to an "other," living abroad as a foreigner forces an individual to reflect on their own national identity. Consequently, foreign experience can reinforce leader nationalism and make cosmopolitan leaders more belligerent. To test our theory, we collect original data on the foreign experiences of national leaders from 1875 to 2015. Our correlational analysis suggests that, in general, leaders with experience living abroad are more likely to initiate militarized interstate disputes than their less cosmopolitan counterparts.

“Introducing the Cosmopolitan Leaders Dataset (CLD): A Dataset of Leaders’ Pre-office Experience Abroad” (with Xunchao Zhang, under review)

Abstract: The Cosmopolitan Leaders Dataset (CLD), a ground-breaking resource that chronicles national leaders' foreign experiences from 1875 to 2015 prior to assuming office, addresses two key gaps in existing leadership datasets: limited temporal and spatial scope, and a lack of focus on leaders' foreign experiences. This dataset, encompassing information from over 143 states and about 2,518 leaders, presents a holistic perspective on leaders who have substantial non-tourist international exposure, serving as a robust tool for researchers in Comparative Politics (CP) and International Relations (IR). The CLD aids in deepening our understanding of how personal international exposure shapes political leadership and influences national and global political dynamics. Its insights can also be valuable across various fields, including international human rights, conflict studies, international trade, and political psychology. This dataset, offering a comprehensive examination of the “cosmopolitan peace hypothesis” and contact theory at the leadership level, invites an innovative exploration of global politics. As the CLD continues to evolve, we anticipate future expansions and refinements, and warmly welcome researchers to contribute to this rich academic resource.

Article: “New Tianxia Theory: Towards a Cosmopolitan State” (in progress)

Abstract: This article critiques Zhao Tingyang's Tianxia theory and proposes a more realistic alternative for achieving a cosmopolitan global order. While Zhao envisions a world united under an inclusive "political ontology of coexistence," his approach overlooks the entrenched nationalistic mindsets and the realities of the modern nation-state system. I argue that true global transformation requires first reforming individual states to prioritize peaceful coexistence over power and intervention. My proposal advocates for a Tianxia concept grounded in state-level changes, promoting a cosmopolitan ideology that emphasizes harmony without uniformity. This approach offers a more feasible path to a stable and inclusive global order, balancing power with moral responsibility.

Article: “A Democratic State?” (in progress)

Abstract: This article explores the theoretical possibility of a democratic state without the need for a democratic government, engaging deeply with modern Chinese political thought and contemporary democratic theory. By examining the ideas of figures such as Mou Zongsan, Mao Zedong, and Wang Hui, alongside Western democratic theories, the article challenges the conventional dichotomy between the “democratic West” and “authoritarian China.” It argues that a state can embody democratic principles—such as equality, freedom, and operational differentiation—through non-governmental aspects, even in the absence of a traditional democratic government. The analysis highlights what might be gained and lost in differentiating a democratic state from a democratic government, questioning whether democracy must be tied exclusively to a regime type. This discussion provides fresh insights into the relationship between the conception of the state and democratic institutions, suggesting that both China and the West can learn valuable lessons by adopting a more holistic understanding of democracy. Ultimately, the article posits that it is possible to have a democratic state, which satisfies core democratic values, without necessarily having a democratic government.