Chinese Religion

Exploratory 3

Xunzi’s Unique Ideas about Leadership

Where ranks in society are equal, there will not be proper distinctions; where power is equally distributed, there will be no unity; when the masses are on the same level, it will be impossible to employ them. That there is Heaven and there is Earth shows that there are differences of higher and lower, but it is only after an enlightened king is established that the state is managed on the basis of regulations. (deBary 98)

I noticed this interesting quote regarding what makes for good “human resources.” Xunzi believed that anyone could rise to the rank of prime minister, men of service, or high court officials regardless of wealth or background. This is advanced for several societies at that time in history, considering societies such as India had a caste system, which would not permit anyone to rise through the ranks. However, Chinese society seemed to be much more flexible. Chinese boys were raised on Confucian concepts in order to be accepted into high ranks in society such as the ones Xunzi mentions, which shows his support for Confucian ideals regarding place in society. On a global level, this concept was also introduced in Japan when Confucian ideals were brought to Japan – the boys in the Japanese feudal era were educated in Confucian schools in order for the states to choose the best of the best to be leaders. It’s interesting to see how different cultures had different beliefs regarding class or caste in society.

Also interesting (though not surprising given class discussions), is the fact that while it was possible to rise through the societal ranks, it was impossible to rise to the rank of a Chinese king without being a member of the royal family’s bloodline. Anyone could become a sage or a prime minister, but not everyone was “fit” to be a king even if they had the perfect ideals and had achieved enlightenment as Confucius defines it. What’s so fascinating about that is how the Chinese believed the Mandate of Heaven is like a privilege (and that it was stripped from one royal family when they overindulged in drink and became alcoholics), but that even if there was a family with the perfect set of ideals and whose members embodied the Chinese view of enlightenment, they could not become the next royal family. Xunzi’s ideas about merit and leadership only go so far. I think one reason this concept of divine right is so strange and appears to be too rigid to us is because of modern American culture and the understood right to choose our leaders, a right which historically was withheld from the Chinese people as a result of their believing in divine right to rule. Maybe it was hard for Xunzi to even imagine a king from outside those blood lines.

On a related topic, Xunzi also refers to the kings being stripped of their right to rule and being demoted to the lifestyle of a commoner if they shall act like unenlightened commoners and men unworthy of ruling. This concept strongly suggests that Xunzi believed that the right to rule was not based on one’s bloodline alone, but also was based on the ability to rule in accordance with The Way. Xunzi specifically mentions adhering to rites and moral principles (pg 98), which are Confucian ideals. Confucius, similarly to Xunzi, believed that superiors had responsibilities to uphold as opposed to just being assertive and bossing around their inferiors. He believed that they had to show respect to their underlings in order to receive respect in return. The leaders also had to express faithfulness to rites and ritual, so as to lead the people properly. A lack of propriety would, in turn, receive a lack of respect or, as Xunzi wished, for the leaders to lose the power they possessed. It seems that this belief that the right can be removed, though it might contradicts an absolute divine right to rule is key to orderliness and governmental stability. I imagine how much of a problem corruption might have been without it.