I assure you it isn't. Confucianism is to Asia what Plato is to the West. I'm not sure how much you know about the subject but to illustrate the gravity, >“The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato" - A.N Whitehead for example, if you compare the four cardinal virtues of Plato *(wisdom, courage, temperance, justice)* to the five cardinal virtues of Confucianism *(benevolence or ren (仁), righteousness or yi (义), propriety or li (理), wisdom or zhi (智) and fidelity or xin (信))* There are many parallels between the Western and Eastern philosophical traditions, and they actually emerged around the same time, another comparison would be Stoicism and Taoism. It's a very interesting topic. >Confucianism is based on the teachings of Master Kong, later Latinized to Confucius, who lived in China from 551 BCE to 479 BCE. His teachings were based on the fundamental principles of the Chinese Zhou Dynasty which ruled over China at the time. The Zhou Dynasty was quite similar to many of the Western models of governance, where you have a series of mostly autonomous self-governing regions stitched together with a federalist framework, like a patchwork quilt. *(kinda like the US, but the US was an attempt by (((certain people))) to replace monarchies with sort of empty husks of "kings" that rely on money being constantly pumped through their veins intravenously, which is exactly why you saw monarchies and churches overthrown by some form of libertarianism during the french revolution, and money pretty much became the ruler of countries. Which bankers coincidentally were there to capitalize on)*. An example would be what [Lega Nord](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lega_Nord) attempted to do in Italy under [Salvini](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matteo_Salvini). They had something called the ["mandate of heaven"](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate_of_Heaven) which essentially meant that if a ruler over a province could not maintain peace and tranquility, they were considered to have lost that mandate and we're immediately deposed. You can see then how this must've made these rulers felt when the general populous in that region started getting unruly. **It made them very nervous.** So this was a very effective strategy at keeping tyranny in check. The Zhou dynasty was the longest lasting dynasty in Chinese history, clocking in at about 800 years. So Asian countries may give somewhat of a nod to Confucianism, but the very principals of Confucianism (for which the writings on the topic are exhaustive, and difficult to leave to interpretation), run contrary to any sort of collectivist society or centrally planned economy. Buddhism is chosen by tyrannical regimes specifically because it is a different tradition of thought that leaves a populous susceptible to nihilism and subsequent subversion. The ideology is literally, "nothing matters" for fucks sake. The US is sort of a bastardization of the Zhou model. And it's no wonder too why leftists, like their contemporary communist allies, have an obsession with Buddhism. Go into Whole Foods and count how many times you see some silhouette of some yoga slut meditating in front of a flower of life with some faggot title like "enlighten-MINT". And they're all subversive communist shit bags. It all goes hand in hand. Have you ever heard a single one of these ass-clowns mention Confucius? Maybe they'll yank a few insightful sounding quotes but that's pretty much the extent of it, because Confucianism is based and nationalistic and anti-authoritarian. Authoritarian regimes want to avoid or strongly discourage ideologies that have anything resembling objective morality, because it means they are held accountable to something above themselves and will be critiqued based on said principals. Like I said that's why I love ancient philosophy and religion because seriously, fucking everything revolves around it. It's just rehashed a thousand ways in a million different forms.