ABSTRACT
This chapter is to examine the claim made by the sincere participants that they should be excused of moral responsibility for the wrongdoing committed under the influence of a peculiar and essentially homogenous political culture. It will first be shown how they may defend their claim by appealing to the notion of sane-deep-self as suggested by Susan Wolf and the inability thesis put forward by Michele M. Moody-Adams. Next, their claim will be critically assessed by an examination of the degree of homogeneity of the prevailing political culture just before and during the Cultural Revolution. It will also be shown that civilians endowed with alternative cultural resources (from pre-1949 China) should be more competent to counteract the corrupted political culture. Finally, it will be argued that sincere participants, though misled by a somewhat homogenous culture, may still be ascribed moral responsibility in the attributability sense on the basis of the defective character they displayed in readily believing in the counterrevolutionary ‘crimes’ committed by their friends, colleagues, or relatives. Moreover, in choosing to act on their sincerely held beliefs despite the possibility that those beliefs might turn out to be seriously mistaken, they should be willing to assume responsibility for whatever wrong that might result if they want to be free from the charge of indulging in their sincerity.
