CHAPTER XXVIII

EXCLUSION OF THE RULING CLASS FROM THE ECONOMIC

FIELD

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

IN modern times the socialist advocates modern socialism against capitalism for the laborers. In ancient times the Confucians advocated Confucian socialism against feudalism for the farmers. These two doctrines are the same in principle, because in the ancient days feudal lords were at the same time capitalists, and the farmers were themselves. laborers. But, when we compare these two doctrines, Confucianism seems to go further than modern socialism. There would be no capitalist under either. Under Confucianism, the important means of production should belong to the public, and the ruling class should get only their salary. When the official class got their salary, however, they could accumulate it and make themselves capitalists. The modern socialist does not exclude salaried officials from the gainful occupations, but the Confucians excluded them entirely. We may say that the difference between the two is due to the fact that in ancient times aristocracy allowed the officials to hold their office by hereditary right, and that in modern times it is not so; hence the Confucians necessarily excluded them. This is true, and it would be the original idea of Confucius. But Confucian socialism means still more. In the first place, Confucianism does not allow aristocracy; no one should hold office by hereditary right. In the second place, even after the abolition of feudalism and aristocracy, and even for those temporary offi

cials, this principle of exclusion was applied. From this it is clear that Confucian socialism goes further than modern socialism.

Moreand the As they

At the time of Confucius, feudalism prevailed over the whole empire. The feudal princes and the noble families occupied all the lands, so that they were the landlords. They owned also a great number of cattle and many other capital goods, so that they were the capitalists. There was small room, indeed, left for the common people. over, they could oppress the people as they would, condition of the people must have been very bad. had all the political powers and social dignities, if they should become competitors with the people in the economic field, they would take all the profits, and the people could have no foothold to compete with them. Then the people would be reduced to the condition of actual slavery. Therefore, on the one hand, Confucius concentrated the political power in an absolute monarchy, and denied the hereditary right of office-holding, in order to destroy feudalism and to transform aristocracy into democracy. On the other, he excluded all officials from the economic field, in order to give full opportunity to the people.

The general law is as follows: "The emperor ought not to talk about whether he has wealth or not; the feudal princes ought not to talk about whether they have more wealth or less; and all the families which enjoy a public salary ought not to compete with the people for profit."1 Promoting the character of the ruling class to a higher ethical standard, taking away their favorable condition and powerful competition from the economic field, and giving a great chance to all common people,-these are the objects of this principle. It has been a great scheme of social reform, and its tendency has been toward economic equality.

1. Exclusion of the Emperor

The principle of exclusion should be first applied to the rulers,—the emperor and the feudal princes. In the Spring and Autumn, there is a law stating that the emperor should not demand anything pecuniary from the feudal princes. When an emperor asked the prince for anything, he was condemned by Confucius. The demand for money was condemned most of all. Since the emperor had the taxes from the imperial state and the tribute from the feudal states, he should be a most moderate man and an example to the whole empire. If the emperor should care for money, it would make the princes avaricious, the great officials miserly, and the students and common people sly. Therefore, the Record of Rites says: "The emperor plants only gourds and flowering plants, not such things as might be stored." 1

2. Exclusion of the Feudal Princes

1

In the Spring and Autumn, there is a condemnation of the fishery of Duke Yin of Lu. The value of his fishes amounted to one hundred catties of gold, which was equal to one million of copper money in the Han dynasty. Ho Hsiu states that he should not leave the government and compete for profit with the people. To do so is a great shame, and not fitting to a ruler.

3. Exclusion of All Salaried Officials

According to Confucius, all the salaried officials should be excluded from the economic field. He says:

The superior man does not take all the profit, but leaves it for the people. It is said in the Canon of Poetry:

"There shall be handfuls left on the ground,

And here ears untouched,

For the benefit of the widow."

1 Li Ki, bk. ix, p. 433.

Hence, when a superior man is in office and enjoys its emoluments, he does not do farming.1

Leaving profit for the people is the fundamental idea of this principle. Its aim is to protect the weak against the strong. Therefore, when Confucius spoke of Tsang Wên-chung, a great official of Lu, he condemned him as wanting in virtue, because he made his concubines weave rush mats for sale.2

The "Great Learning" says: " He who keeps horses and a carriage does not look after fowls and pigs. The family which keeps stores of ice does not rear cattle or sheep.' The first sentence refers to the one who is beginning to be a great official; and the second, to the great official and minister. Indeed, none of the officials should do any business.

II. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THESE PRINCIPLES.

1. Example of Kung-yi Hsiu.

The best example illustrating the exclusion of officials from gainful occupation is given by Kung-yi Hsiu. After taking the professorship of Lu, he became the prime minister of Duke Mu (145-176 A. K. or 407-376 B. C.). He was the first one who enacted the Confucian theory of exclusion as a legal law. Under his administration, the salaried officials were not allowed to compete for profit with the people. When some one gave him a fish, he declined. The giver said, "I have heard that you like fish. Why do you refuse my present of fish?" "Because I like fish, I do not accept it," answered the minister. "Now, as I am a min

ister, I am able to buy fish myself.

If I should accept the

fish and should lose my position, who will give me fish in the future? For this reason I do not accept it." From his

1 Li Ki, bk. xxvii, p. 296.

Classics, vol. v, pt. i, p. 234.

Classics, vol. i, pp. 379-380.

statement, we may surmise that there was a law forbidding officials to accept anything from any person. It is stated: "He who has received one great thing is not allowed to take the small one." When Kung-yi Hsiu ate the edible mallow, he pulled it in his garden and threw it away. When he had seen his wife weave cloth, he burned the loom and divorced her. He said: "As I have received salary, why should I snatch, too, the profits of gardener and weaver?" In the Historical Record, his words are put in this way: "How can the farmer and the working girl find a place to sell their commodities?" 2 The essential point is that the officials should get only their salary and leave the whole economic field free for the common people.

1

2. Statement of Tung Chung-shu

In 412 (140 B. C.), Tung Chung-shu gave to Han Wu Ti an answer that has become famous. In criticizing the social conditions of his time, he says:

For example, those

Heaven has also the law of distribution. animals which are given upper front teeth have no horns; the bird, having wings, has only two legs. This means that those who have received great things are not allowed to take small ones. In ancient times, the salaried officials did not live by physical labor, and did not touch industrial occupations. This also shows that those who have received great things are not allowed to take small ones. It is the same idea as that of Heaven. If a man had received the great things and took the small ones too, even Heaven could not satisfy his covetousness-how could man satisfy him? This is the reason people suffer in poverty. A man whose personality is already honorable, and who has risen to high position, whose family, in addition, is already rich, who receives a large salary,

1

1 Quoted by Tung Chung-shu, History of Han, ch. lvi.

2 Historical Record, ch. cxix.