Dai Yingzhi said to Mencius:
“We’d like to implement a 10% tax rate and abolish tariffs at borders and markets, but we can’t do it all this year.
Could we reduce the taxes a bit for now, and fully abolish them next year? What do you think?”
Mencius replied:
“Suppose someone steals a chicken from his neighbor every day.
If someone tells him, ‘This isn’t what a gentleman does,’
and he replies, ‘Then I’ll cut back – only one chicken a month – and stop completely next year.’
If he already knows it’s wrong, he should stop immediately. Why wait until next year?”
戴盈之曰：「什一，去關市之征，今茲未能。請輕之，以待來年，然後已，何如？」
孟子曰：「今有人日攘其鄰之雞者，或告之曰：『是非君子之道。』曰：『請損之，月攘一雞，以待來年，然後已。』如知其非義，斯速已矣，何待來年。」
Note
This passage from Mencius: Teng Wen Gong II uses the sharp metaphor of chicken theft to expose the moral evasion behind political procrastination.
Immediate rectification of wrongdoing
Mencius insists: once an action is recognized as unjust – whether personal theft or state over taxation – it must cease at once. Gradualism in immorality is still immorality.
Critique of bureaucratic excuses
Dai Yingzhi’s proposal mirrors realpolitik reasoning: acknowledge the ideal, but delay implementation. Mencius unmasks this as hypocrisy disguised as pragmatism – a way to sustain exploitation under reformist rhetoric.
The Confucian fiscal ideal
The “10% tax” and abolition of market tolls represent core tenets of benevolent governance. For Mencius, these are not policy options but moral imperatives, as fundamental as honesty in personal conduct.
Moralizing politics through analogy
By equating excessive taxation with theft, Mencius collapses the distinction between private vice and public injustice. State power offers no moral exemption – rulers are judged by the same ethical standards as ordinary people.
Historical Legacy
This argument became a cornerstone for later Confucian critics of fiscal oppression, from Dong Zhongshu to Huang Zongxi, who condemned “incremental reform” that perpetuates systemic harm.
Idealism as moral compass
While seemingly impractical, Mencius’s stance serves a crucial function: establishing an uncompromising standard of justice. Without such a benchmark, “gradual change” easily becomes permanent injustice.
Mencius thus delivers a timeless rebuke: There is no “light” version of wrongdoing – and no acceptable delay in doing what is right.
Leave a Reply