Daniel Bell, who teaches at Tsinghua University in Beijing, wrote the following Op-Ed in the New York times a few days ago:

Jiang Qing, a leading exponent of the new Confucianism, explicitly criticizes the idea of state sovereignty, saying that sovereignty lies with “heaven” rather than the state. He argues for a democratic institution that would offer more opportunities for political participation, while criticizing democracy for being too narrowly focused on the interests of the current generation of voters. Jiang proposes another political institution designed to represent non-voters whose interests are typically neglected in democratic states, such as foreigners, future generations and ancestors... Communism is dead as a unifying myth that can sustain the Chinese people, they argue, so what does China stand for now? Here’s where Confucian values become relevant.

It should be noted that Bell himself is a member of the "Left" himself, and it's informative to see how he operates in this Chinese environment. While I like Confucianism a lot, I don't see it in the same terms as Bell. Bell is ideologically aligned the China's "New Left" which is seeking to create a new socialist paradise only this time basing it on a Confucian model. The contempt for democracy that is felt amongst the liberal elite in USA comes out in full unshackled form from this academic when he finds himself in a place where he doesn't even need to pretend that the will of the people matters. Still, the questions that are raised are interesting: what happens when you deny state sovereignty and replace it with the Will of Heaven? How do we cope with the interests of non-voters?