Based on the above statements, Shang Yang gained notoriety as an advocate of oppression; But in fact, his attitude towards people is much more balanced than is often imagined. Lord Shang`s book frequently speaks of “love/care of the people” (ai min 愛民) and “benefit of the people” (li min 利民) and repeats other contemporary texts that proclaimed the welfare of the people as the ultimate goal of policy-making (Pines 2009:201-203). The people are not only the potential enemy of the sovereign: they are his greatest asset. Without their hard work in the fields or their courage on the battlefield, the state is doomed. But people will not accept ploughing and war just for fear of coercion. A more complex system is needed: one that introduces attractive positive incentives as well as impressive negative incentives. Shang Yang explains: As easily as mediocre carpenters can draw circles with a compass, anyone can use the system envisioned by Han Fei. [262] The enlightened leader limits his wishes and refrains from showing his personal competence or contributing to politics. Skills are not rejected, but the ability to use talent will give more power to the leader if they can use other people with the given expertise. [263] Laws and regulations allow him to make maximum use of his power. The average monarch unswervingly abides by legal and institutional agreements and is numinous.
[264] [265] A.C. Graham writes: Han Fei regards Xing-Ming as an essential element of autocracy and says: “In the same way that it is assumed that unit names have a primary meaning. When the names are put in order, things are settled; If they go wrong, things are not corrected. [209] He points out that this system, originally developed by Shen Buhai, allowed for the development of uniformity of language,[95] functions could be strictly defined to prevent conflict and corruption, and that objective rules (Fa) could be established that were impervious to dissenting interpretations judged solely on their effectiveness. [106] By reducing the options to one, the discussion of “the right way to govern” could be eliminated. When the Zhou Dynasty (1046 – 256 BC) began to collapse and the individual states of China fought against each other under their rule, the states sought the most expedient system to maintain social order. The seven states of China—Chu, Han, Qi, Qin, Wei, Yan, and Zhao—all believed themselves fit to govern and replace the Zhou. In 1975, A.F.P.
Hulsewé wrote: “[Shang Yang and Han Fei] were not so much interested in the content of the laws as in their use as a political tool. Mainly criminal laws and a reward system were the two “handles”. [322] In 1982, Arthur Waley contrasted what he called realists in China with other schools: realists, he said, largely ignored the individual and considered the goal of each society to be the domination of other societies,[323] In his 1989 book “Disputers of the Tao,” Angus Charles Graham titled his chapter “Legalist” “Legalism: an amoral science of the art of governing”, Sketching the foundations of an “amoral science” of Chinese thought, largely based on Han Feizi, consisting of “adapting institutions to changing situations and removing precedents if necessary; concentration of power in the hands of the ruler; and, above all, the control of the fragmented bureaucracy.” [140]: 267 [324] These sayings and many others like explain Shang Yang`s image as a “detractor of the people.” No other thinker was as explicit as he was when he pointed out the persistent contradiction between society (“the people”) and the state.