Chapter 27: Discussing Confucianism, Mohism, and Taoism with the First Emperor

After offering a brief justification, Li Nian formally began: "Beyond a few minor schools, the Hundred Schools of Thought each possess their own political philosophies—that is, their own visions for governing the world. For instance, the Confucianists seek to restore the rituals of the Zhou Dynasty, the Taoists advocate for 'governing through non-action,' and the Mohists champion 'universal love' and 'non-aggression.'"

"During the Spring and Autumn period, hearts were restless, and the various thinkers sought better ways to govern the world. Their proposals were not inherently wrong; the problem lay in the fact that these theories overlooked certain factors. In the parlance of later generations, they were too subjective and ignored objective reality."

"Take the Confucian desire to restore the Zhou rituals. They believed that by reviving the ritual and music systems of the Zhou era, the world would return to peace and prosperity. Yet, they never considered whether the people actually wished to return to the conditions of the Zhou era. That is why, during the Spring and Autumn period, Confucius found himself rebuffed everywhere, his doctrines left unadopted."

"The same applies to the Taoists and Mohists. Is the Mohist concept of 'universal love and non-aggression' good? Of course it is—treating a stranger with the same care as one's own kin!"

"If I were a stranger encountering a Mohist disciple, I would certainly be delighted. But if I were that disciple's own family member, how would I feel? I would likely wish for them to be closer to me than to others."

After addressing the Confucians and Mohists, Li Nian turned to the Taoists: "The Taoist 'Huang-Lao' school advocates for 'non-action,' which at first glance seems more viable than the ideals of the Mohists or Confucians. However, when should one perform 'non-action'? In what matters? To what degree? And with what intensity?"

"The same holds true for their doctrine of 'doing nothing while leaving nothing undone.' When should one act? In what matters? To what degree? And with what intensity? A scholar of vast wisdom might be able to grasp the proper measure, but are there truly so many such sages in the world?"

The Huang-Lao philosophy sounds excellent—respecting natural laws, opposing the reckless impulses of rulers, and advocating for the subjective initiative of the people, all while encouraging one to "wait for the right moment" and "act in accordance with the times."

Yet, how is this "right moment" to be grasped, and who decides it? The sovereign or the subjects? The learned elite or the illiterate commoner?

How can one know if this "moment" is judged accurately? Does every person or class perceive this "moment" in the same way? And what should be done when they differ?

Simply put, using Huang-Lao philosophy to govern the world lacks a relatively unified standard and system. Everyone is granted too much freedom, which is detrimental to the stability of the world and the security of the throne.

The rebellions of the princes and kings during the early Han Dynasty—such as those of the Princes of Jibei and Huainan under Emperor Wen, the Rebellion of the Seven States under Emperor Jing, and the rise of local power elites—were partly caused by the "governing through non-action" of the Huang-Lao school, which provided the necessary conditions for these regional forces to grow.

How could Emperor Wu of Han, with his immense desire for power and grand vision, tolerate such a state of affairs? Naturally, he adopted a reformed version of Confucianism and cast the Huang-Lao school aside.

"If one uses the Huang-Lao school to govern a country, it may suffice when the dynasty is newly established and everything is in ruins. But as time goes on, disaster is inevitable."

People can only enjoy relative freedom; absolute freedom is impossible.

Li Nian’s explanation to Ying Zheng was: "Because the Huang-Lao philosophy imposes too loose a restraint on the world, and human desire is endless, disasters inevitably arise, which in turn undermines the peace of the realm."

In reality, as a dynasty stabilizes and its economy recovers, the Huang-Lao philosophy gradually fails to meet the needs of social development.

"For Confucianism to succeed, everyone in the world must be a gentleman. For the Mohist method of governance to succeed, there must be no distinction between those close to us and those distant. For the Huang-Lao school to succeed, everyone must strictly follow the law, harbor no greed, and entertain no delusions. If these things could be achieved, we would indeed have a Great Unity!"

The governing philosophies of the Confucians, Mohists, and Taoists differ, but their ultimate goal is the same: a world of Great Unity, a utopian ideal.

But how can humans exist without desire or self-interest?

Therefore, while the political philosophies of the Hundred Schools are noble, they are impractical—at least, they are not suited to the current reality of the Great Qin.

The reason Confucianism was eventually chosen by Emperor Wu of Han was that it had undergone a transformation.

Having heard Li Nian's analysis of the three schools, Ying Zheng asked: "Is the Legalist school unsuitable for governing the Great Qin for the same reasons as the others?"

Li Nian replied: "There is a well-known truth in later generations: 'All things in the world are in motion,' which can also be understood as 'All things in the world are in a state of change.' May I ask, Your Majesty, how did the Shang Dynasty compare to the Xia? How did the Zhou compare to the Shang? How did the Six States compare to the Zhou, and how does our Great Qin compare to the Six States?"

Ying Zheng did not answer directly but asked: "You mean that because things are constantly changing, and the Great Qin is also changing, the Legalist school is no longer suitable for the present?"

Li Nian nodded. "For a certain period, the Legalist school was suited to the Qin, which is why our strength grew so rapidly, allowing us to surpass the Six States in one stroke. But the Great Qin of today is no longer the same as it was then."

"In those days, the power of the Great Qin was meager, and we were not strong among the nations. Had we not enacted the reforms of Lord Shang, our state would have perished. But now, the Six States are destroyed, the world is unified, and within the Nine Provinces, there is no longer any rival to the Qin. Can we still govern the Great Qin using the same Legalist methods as we did before unification?"

"Your Majesty is no longer merely the King of Qin; you are the Sovereign of the World. When considering strategies for governance, you can no longer think as you once did. You must look at the entire world, for the people of the former Six States are now also the people of the Great Qin."

Zhu Yuanzhang once faced a similar problem—the North-South Examination Case—but he handled it well. He understood clearly that he was the Sovereign of All, not just an emperor of the North or the South.

Ying Zheng felt a sudden shock. Even though he had already touched upon this thought, hearing it pointed out by Li Nian felt like a thunderclap to his ears.

'Indeed, I am no longer just the King of Qin; I am the Sovereign of the World. The Legalist school, which could govern the Qin, may not be able to govern the entire world. The Great Qin of today is no longer the Qin of my ancestors when they employed Lord Shang. In the history that was, without Li Nian, did I fail to grasp this, thereby sowing the seeds of the Great Qin's destruction?'

Ying Zheng asked himself this in his heart. Had Li Nian known, he would certainly have told him: In history, Your Majesty did realize you were the Sovereign of the World, which is why you standardized the script, the axle lengths, and the codes of conduct. However, you did not realize that the old Legalism was no longer suitable for the current Qin. By applying those harsh methods to the entire world, you made it unbearable not only for the Qin people but even more so for the people of the Six States.

Later generations often equate Legalism with the rule of law, but they are vastly different. Legalism is designed specifically to serve the monarch and is extremely harsh and cruel toward the people.

The five arts of Legalist governance—stupefying the people, exhausting the people, humiliating the people, weakening the people, and impoverishing the people—were all aimed at diminishing the power of the populace to secure the ruler’s control.

This was not only the philosophy of the *Book of Lord Shang*; such ideas are also present in the *Han Feizi*.

The First Emperor’s decision to "burn the books and bury the scholars" was largely due to Li Si, who used Legalist thought to persuade him to do so. Li Si was, after all, a man of the Legalist school.

For over a hundred years, the people of Qin had been able to endure Legalist governance. But now that the world was unified, continuing such high-pressure rule was like pulling a metal wire—even the strongest cord has a moment when it snaps. And the people of the Six States, having never been treated in such a manner before, were even more prone to resentment.