Mencius said, “Those who serve rulers today say, ‘I can open up new lands for my ruler and fill his treasuries.’ Yet, those who are called ‘good ministers’ today were called ‘plunderers of the people’ in ancient times. If a ruler does not aspire to the Way and has no will for benevolence, and a minister still seeks to enrich him, he is merely enriching a tyrant like Jie.
They also say, ‘I can form alliances for my ruler, and we will surely win every battle.’ Yet, those who are called ‘good ministers’ today were also called ‘plunderers of the people’ in ancient times. If a ruler does not aspire to the Way and has no will for benevolence, and a minister still seeks to make him strong in warfare, he is merely assisting a tyrant like Jie.
If we continue along the current path without changing the current customs, even if the entire empire were handed over to such a ruler, he would not be able to hold onto it for a single morning.”
Note
This passage from the Gaozi II chapter of the Mencius is Mencius’s most fierce and direct attack on the utilitarian political climate of the Warring States period. He ruthlessly tears off the disguise of the so-called “good ministers” of his time, completely shifting the criteria of political evaluation from “utilitarianism” back to “morality.” Drawing on historical context and traditional commentaries, we can understand its philosophy through the following dimensions:
- Redefining “Good Ministers” and “Plunderers of the People”: A Moral Judgment on Utilitarianism
During the era of intense interstate competition, rulers were most eager for “national wealth and military power.” Therefore, ministers who could expand territories, fill treasuries, and win wars were honored as “good ministers.” Mencius, however, shockingly labeled them “plunderers of the people.” In his view, if national wealth and military might deviate from the track of “benevolent governance,” they become tools for oppressing the people and launching wars of aggression. If a minister fails to advise the ruler to practice benevolent governance but instead helps him amass wealth and wage reckless wars, he is essentially aiding a tyrant and is a criminal who harms the people of the world. - The Metaphor of “Enriching Jie” and “Assisting Jie”: Strength Without Moral Direction is a Disaster
Mencius uses “Jie,” the most notorious tyrant in Chinese history, as a metaphor, which is profoundly impactful. He points out that if a ruler’s intentions are corrupt (not aspiring to the Way or benevolence), a minister helping him accumulate wealth is “enriching Jie,” and helping him strengthen his military is “assisting Jie.” This means that if political strength lacks moral steering, its destructive power will be exponentially magnified. Mencius uses this to warn the rulers of his time: “Wealth” and “strength” without benevolence as a foundation are not blessings for the state, but rather catalysts that accelerate its destruction. - “Unable to Hold Onto It for a Single Morning”: Regimes Lacking Legitimacy Are Doomed to Be Short-Lived
At the end, Mencius makes a highly forward-looking political prophecy: if the hegemonic politics of profit-seeking continue, even if the empire is handed over to such a ruler, he will not be able to hold onto it for a day. This reveals the core Confucian logic regarding “political legitimacy” – the empire can only be won through the submission of hearts via benevolence, not through submission to violence and wealth. An empire seized through conspiracies and military plunder, lacking moral legitimacy and popular support, is bound to collapse in a very short time.
孟子曰：“今之事君者曰：‘我能为君辟土地，充府库。’今之所谓良臣，古之所谓民贼也。君不乡道，不志于仁，而求富之，是富桀也。‘我能为君约与国，战必克。’今之所谓良臣，古之所谓民贼也。君不乡道，不志于仁，而求为之强战，是辅桀也。由今之道，无变今之俗，虽与之天下，不能一朝居也。”
Leave a Reply