Mencius once said to King Xuan of Qi:
“When we speak of an ‘ancient state’ – a nation with deep roots – it is not because it has towering old trees, but because it possesses generations of virtuous and capable ministers. Yet Your Majesty has no truly trusted advisors left. Those you promoted in the past – you don’t even know whether they are alive or dead today.”
Alarmed, the king asked,
“Then how can I recognize an unworthy man and dismiss him?”
Mencius replied:
“When a ruler appoints the worthy, it is often out of necessity. But doing so may mean elevating someone of low rank above those of high status, or someone distant above close relatives. Should this not be done with utmost caution?
Do not appoint someone just because your court attendants say he is virtuous. Do not trust him merely because the high ministers praise him. Only when the entire populace says, ‘He is virtuous,’ should you investigate – and if you find him truly worthy, then employ him.
Similarly, if your attendants say a man is unfit, do not act hastily. If the ministers say he is unfit, still do not rush to judgment. Wait until the people all say he is unfit; then examine him carefully. Only if you confirm his incompetence should you remove him.
Even in matters of life and death: if your inner circle cries for execution, do not listen. If the ministers demand his death, do not yield. Only when the whole nation declares, ‘He deserves to die,’ should you investigate – and if his guilt is clear, then carry out the sentence. Thus, it is not you who kills him, but the people.
Only by governing in this way – listening to the people, verifying with care, and acting with justice – can a ruler truly become a ‘parent to the people.’”
孟子見齊宣王曰：「所謂故國者，非謂有喬木之謂也，有世臣之謂也。王無親臣矣，昔者所進，今日不知其亡也。」
王曰：「吾何以識其不才而舍之？」
曰：「國君進賢，如不得已，將使卑踰尊，疏踰戚，可不慎與？左右皆曰賢，未可也；諸大夫皆曰賢，未可也；國人皆曰賢，然後察之；見賢焉，然後用之。左右皆曰不可，勿聽；諸大夫皆曰不可，勿聽；國人皆曰不可，然後察之；見不可焉，然後去之。左右皆曰可殺，勿聽；諸大夫皆曰可殺，勿聽；國人皆曰可殺，然後察之；見可殺焉，然後殺之。故曰，國人殺之也。如此，然後可以為民父母。」
Note
This passage from Mencius: King Hui of Liang II reveals a radical vision for its time: political legitimacy flows from public consensus, not royal whim.
Mencius does not advocate democracy, but he insists that wise rule must be rooted in the collective moral judgment of the people, tempered by the ruler’s discernment. In an age of autocracy and intrigue, his call for accountability, transparency, and humane justice remains profoundly resonant.
According to the Records of the Grand Historian, although King Xuan of Qi once recruited scholars from the Jixia Academy, he did so largely for show; in actual governance, he still relied on favored courtiers like Wang Huan. This led to talent drain and political instability – so much so that “those he had promoted vanished, and he did not even know where they had gone.”
Mencius proposed a personnel selection mechanism that closely resembles “public opinion as initial screening + the ruler’s final review,” an idea remarkably progressive for the pre-Qin era. It was neither democracy (since ultimate authority remained with the ruler) nor aristocratic hereditary rule, but rather a meritocratic model grounded in public consensus, emphasizing that the legitimacy of governance stems from the people’s approval.
The concluding line – “Only thus can one become a parent to the people” – clarifies the ultimate goal of Confucian political thought: the ruler is not a distant, absolute sovereign, but a benevolent, just, and protective figure akin to a caring parent. This ideal is echoed elsewhere in Mencius: Li Lou I:
“If a ruler severely oppresses his people, he will be assassinated and his state destroyed; if he oppresses them less severely, he will still face personal peril and territorial decline.”
Leave a Reply