Each of the competing « schools of thought » sought ways to improve the functioning of the state, achieve socio-political stability, and establish peace under heaven; But among a multitude of answers, those given by legalists seem to be the most practical. This is no coincidence: after all, some of the most important legalistic thinkers, especially Shang Yang, were the leading reformers of their time. Legalistic thinkers were at the forefront of administrative and socio-political innovation; they were more willing to abandon past norms and paradigms; And they were more pragmatic and results-oriented than most of their ideological rivals. On the other hand, their hostility to traditional culture and moralistic discourse, as well as their highly critical attitude towards other members of the educated elite and their pronounced anti-ministerial approach, have earned them considerable hostility. In the long run, Sima Tan`s observation seems correct: the legalists` recipes were very effective in the short term, but much less attractive in the long term. Han Fei`s immediate response is that the ruler should protect himself by carefully applying the techniques of government described above. It should review the reports of its ministers, review their performance, promote them or demote them according to the correspondence between « performance » and « name »; He must remain calm and mysterious, and let them be exposed; He should encourage mutual spying and whistleblowing between his ministers. But this supposedly clean solution is problematic. First, it sometimes requires superhuman intellectual abilities of the ruler, in direct contradiction to Han Fei`s insistence that his system is suitable for an « average » (i.e. mediocre) ruler (Han Feizi 40:392).
Second, it is still unclear how the ruler has access to reliable information if each of his close associates – as Han Fei reminds him – is a potential fraudster (Han Feizi 6:36-37). And third, a system that requires constant surveillance of all can easily fall into the trap of totalitarian regimes in which « each agent in charge of inspection and control must logically be inspected and controlled himself » (Graziani 2015: 175). Han Fei`s foresight regarding ministerial machinations is remarkable, but it ultimately involves the ruler in the nightmarish situation of widespread distrust and distrust. Han Fei`s proposal to eliminate « texts written in books and about bamboo strips » and turn civil servants into teachers was implemented by his classmate and arch-enemy Li Si shortly after the imperial unification of 221 BC. In 213 BC. After heated legal debates, Li Si launched an all-out assault on « private learning, » which he identified as intellectually divisive and politically subversive. He then proposed to remove copies of the canonical books of poems and documents, as well as the speeches of the hundred schools, from private collections, leaving copies only in the possession of court scholars (bo shi博士). Li Si concluded his proposal by repeating Han Fei`s views: « And those who want to study laws and regulations should take an official as their teacher! » (Shiji 87:2546; Watson, 1993: 185). Now, if the ruler listens to [a certain] doctrine, if he approves of his doctrine, he must spread it among the officials and employ their followers; If he disapproves of their doctrine, he should dismiss their disciples and cut them off. (Han Feizi 50:459) The Yellow Emperor said, « A hundred battles a day are fought between the superior and his subordinates. » Subordinates hide their private [interests] and try to test their superior; The supervisor applies standards and measures to restrict subordinates.
Therefore, when norms and standards are established, they are the treasure of the leader; When cliques and cabals are formed, they are the minister`s treasure. If the minister does not assassinate his leader, it is because the cliques and the cabal are not formed. (Han Feizi 8:51) The last sentence presents the reasons for the construction model of Shang Yang State. If a radical restructuring of society was legitimate in the past, it is also legitimate in the present. In the current situation where people « know », a powerful state capable of forcing its subjects is the only viable solution. Lord Shang`s book (but not Han Feizi) has raised the possibility that in the future the need for excessive coercion will end and a softer, morally motivated political structure will develop, but these utopian digressions are of secondary importance in the text (Pines 2013a). What matters is the bottom line: radical reforms were inevitable in the past; And they are inevitable in the present. The technique consists in assigning official positions according to one`s own responsibility, examining reality according to one`s name, holding the clutches of death and life, judging the abilities of each minister. That is what the rule should hold.
(Han Feizi 43:397) Performance and title refer to instructions and tasks. The Minister presents his statement; The sovereign assigns tasks to him according to his declaration and evaluates his merits exclusively according to the task. If merit coincides with the task and the task coincides with the declaration, [the Minister] is rewarded; If the merit does not match the task and the task does not match the statement, he will be punished. (Han Feizi 7:40–41) In addition to crises and bloodshed, the Warring States period was also a time of opportunity for intellectually active individuals. It was an extraordinarily dynamic period, marked by new beginnings and profound changes in all areas of life. Politically, the loose aristocratic units of the spring and autumn periods have been replaced by centralized, bureaucratized territorial states (Lewis 1999). Economically, the introduction of iron utensils (Wagner 1993) has revolutionized agriculture, allowed higher yields, led to the development of wasteland, led to population growth and accelerated urbanization and commercialization of the economy. On the military front, new technologies such as the crossbow, as well as new forms of military organization, led to the replacement of aristocratic tank armies with mass infantry armies composed of peasant conscripts, resulting in a drastic increase in the scale and complexity of warfare (Lewis 1999). And socially, the hereditary aristocracy that dominated the Zhou world for much of the Bronze Age (c. 1500-400 BC). A.D.) was overshadowed by a much wider layer of shi士 (sometimes translated as « service men ») who owed their position primarily to their abilities rather than their pedigree (Pines 2013c).
These profound changes required new approaches to various administrative, economic, military, social and ethical issues: old truths had to be reconsidered or reinterpreted. For intellectuals eager to tackle a multitude of new issues – and especially for legalists – it was a golden age. One of the infamous controversial dictates of the Book of Lord Shang says, « When the people are weak, the state is strong; therefore, the state that owns the way is doomed to the weakening of the people » (Shang jun shu 20:121; Book of Lord Shang 20.1). Elsewhere, the text states: But apart from intriguing ministers, the sovereign must be wary of his own mistakes, which may be even worse than the plans of his enemies. The monarch is the most revered individual, but also the weakest chain in the government apparatus. He can be deceived by his subordinates, tends to misjudge them, and his actions can often threaten the very foundations of the political order he is supposed to protect. Therefore, the thinker repeatedly exhorts the leader to refrain from personal activity, trust in personal knowledge, and manifestation of personal likes and dislikes. « He who relies on his personal abilities is the worst leader »; « If the sovereign abandons the law and behaves selfishly, there is no difference between the rulers and the governed »; « If the ruler has selfish goodness, the governed have selfish desires » (Han Feizi 48:432; 6:32; 45:414 and saepe).
