HISTORY OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY

Kim Romer R. Guadalquiver

SVPCS AB Philo-I

Refutation on Mencius’ Justification on Revolution

Matters on the aspect of politics and society were the focal point of the Chinese
thought from the ancient times and even down to the present day. Perhaps Confucianism can
be considered the most prominent and influential Chinese political philosophy from the
primeval age of the Chinese civilization. The Confucians put emphasis on conflict resolution
among political societies through the application of the Confucian Principles that are geared
towards harmony in general. Though most Confucians advocate conforming principles,
succeeding Confucian philosophers differ in their approach in dealing with political and
moral philosophies. One of the well-known Confucian philosophers was Mencius, or Mengzi
(ca. 371 BCE). Mencius was part of Confucius’ fourth generation of disciples since he was
educated by Tzu Ssu, grandson of Confucius, and he was also often considered an idealistic
Confucian. Mencius gave emphasis on philosophical matters of politics, economy, goodness
of human nature and its metaphysical basis, mysticism, and ideal man as well as an ideal
society.
Mencius’ political philosophy was a relevant, definitive and on-point political idea,
especially in the socio-political atmosphere during his lifetime. And now Mencius’ political
ideas and principles remain as classic and noteworthy as it is in the history of Chinese
Philosophy. Mencius is quite different in the way he sees the state and the economy and he
disregards the traditional view of his time. His political perspective focuses on the overall
good and benefit of the people, not on certain aristocratic individuals. Moreover, Mencius,
like Confucius, emphasizes the duties of the rulers especially the essential requirement of
moral character. Mencius advocates the feudal type of government, and he asserts that the
ideal king or the feudal leader (Pa) should willfully enforce regulations in line with the heart
of the people under his jurisdiction, in sympathy with them, and not for his own honor and
gain. However, Mencius emphasizes that if the ruler’s heart and will are not in compliance
with the heart of the people, and if the government becomes tyrannical and not profitable to
the economy and society, then there is a need for overthrowing the king or the leader through
a revolution. Briefly speaking, when the ruler no longer rules for the welfare of the people, it
is the right of the people to revolt against him and dethrone him.
Throughout the centuries, various revolutions have occurred and been successful in
overthrowing tyrant rulers, dictators, and absolute monarchs, and revolution has become the
means to bring political, social, and economic change and reforms to societies. “Revolution”
is not looked upon as a vicious word to use, but rather as a word associated with lofty ideals,
and it was frequently used to denote a justifiable claim by the people to depose a tyrant ruler,
and Mencius was perhaps the first philosopher to have justified and advocated revolution.
Mencius considers the people as the essential element that comprises a political society. He
articulates that “people are of primary importance. The state is of less importance. The
sovereign (leader) is of least importance.” Hence, he argues that the people have sovereignty
and that they have the right to revolt against a tyrant government. Mencius also asserts that a
ruler whose actions do not conform to his function should be deposed because he has lost the
“Mandate of Heaven,” or his divine rights to rule, and the “Mandate of Heaven,” according to
Mencius, is the mandate of the people. Furthermore, for Mencius, revolution against a
tyrannical government is acceptable, reasonable, and justifiable if it results in cooperation
within a political society. However, if cooperation is vague, at least revolution may result in
the profit and benefit of the vast majority of the people.
Though Mencius’ justification on revolution is definitive and relevant, especially
during his time, since he lived in an ancient Chinese civilization, his ideas on the people’s
right to revolt can be at some point refuted and criticized. For the Confucians, leaders and
kings have the “Mandate of Heaven” to govern a certain kingdom, and for Mencius, the
mandate of heaven is the mandate of the people, or in modern thought, “Vox Populi, Vox
Dei” (the voice of the people is the voice of God). In ancient civilizations, this can be
problematic. Let’s say, for instance, that in a particular society where people were less
educated (considering themselves as having little virtues) and did not totally understand how
the economy and government worked, and one certain educated individual (asserting great
virtues) encouraged the people to revolt against the ruler and insisted that this had done
economically erroneous. The people believed this since, for Mencius, the ones with little
virtues should submit themselves to those of great virtues, and education defines this
hierarchy in virtues. The ruler in himself is innocent of any tyranny against the people and
society, but because of the ignorance of the people and false accusations, he was overthrown
through a revolution. For Mencius, this can be justified since it can result in cooperation and
the people may consider the ruler to have no heart for them, but this revolution is inadequate
because the people are the ones who made an irresolute move against the ruler. This scenario
is contrary and opposed to what the Confucians and Mencius believe about the mandate of
heaven as the mandate of the people.
Another case would be that, in a particular society where a ruler was dethroned due to
his tyranny, and another ruler chosen by the people seats in. However, the new ruler has also
exercised autocracy and does not anymore carry the will of the society. The people then again
revolt and expel the new ruler. Again, the people chose another ruler, but also faced the same
fate. In the line of thinking of Mencius, revolts in this situation are justifiable and acceptable,
yet a series of revolutions can bring some unfavorable and adverse consequences to society’s
status quo and economic condition that may also lead to the failure of the social order within
that society. Further weaknesses of Mencius’ justification on revolution could also be
hypothetically observed in a political atmosphere where conquest and colonization are
recurring. The ruler could assert tyranny in order to defend his territory, but Mencius’
political idea encourages revolution against this type of attitude. If a revolution against the
ruler begins, conquerors could take advantage of the revolution and could initiate
colonization in a ferocious way. In short, the revolution could be the gateway the colonizers
use to take over a particular kingdom or society. Upheaval in this situation may have resulted
in cooperation, but because of the intruders, the society or the kingdom could fall. Lastly,
Mencius’ idea on revolution could also be questioned in its moral ground since revolts can
result in violence and cruelty, especially if the ruler to be dethroned responds aggressively to
the people. And if the people are the ones that assert violence, their motives could also be
morally questioned.
In conclusion, Mencius’ political and social philosophies are indeed valuable for us
all, for we are political beings. This further proves that the extensiveness and brilliance of
Mencius’ exposition and scholarly activity in the field of political philosophy have been
strongly influential and empowering to the people and societies that seek to establish a
legitimate form of government and an authentic ruler, especially in the ancient Chinese
civilization. Indeed, Mencius’ political ideas clearly tell us that a fitting political system is
one in which the people are also sovereign, thus, the ruler should always conform to the heart
of the people. Furthermore, Mencius’ justification on revolution is truly valuable in the fields
of political and oriental philosophy, and perhaps his ideas about revolution were beneficial to
the succeeding civilization, which desired only a peaceful and orderly society. However, even
though his ideas have loopholes and inadequacy, they've still remained classic.