Libertarianism
in Ancient China
by
Murray
N. Rothbard
This article
is excerpted from "It All
Began, As Usual, with the Greeks" in Economic
Thought Before Adam Smith. An MP3 audio file of this article,
read by Jeff Riggenbach, is available
for download.
The three
main schools of political thought: the Legalists, the Taoists,
and the Confucians, were established from the sixth to the fourth
centuries BC. Roughly, the Legalists, the latest of the three
broad schools, simply believed in maximal power to the state,
and advised rulers how to increase that power. The Taoists were
the world's first libertarians, who believed in virtually no interference
by the state in economy or society, and the Confucians were middle-of-the-roaders
on this critical issue. The towering figure of Confucius (551–479
BC), whose name was actually Ch'iu Chung-ni, was an erudite man
from an impoverished but aristocratic family of the fallen Yin
dynasty, who became Grand Marshal of the state of Sung. In practice,
though far more idealistic, Confucian thought differed little
from the Legalists, since Confucianism was largely dedicated to
installing an educated philosophically minded bureaucracy to rule
in China.
By far the
most interesting of the Chinese political philosophers were the
Taoists, founded by the immensely important but shadowy figure
of Lao Tzu. Little is known about Lao Tzu's life, but he was apparently
a contemporary and personal acquaintance of Confucius. Like the
latter he came originally from the state of Sung and was a descendant
of lower aristocracy of the Yin dynasty. Both men lived in a time
of turmoil, wars and statism, but each reacted very differently.
For Lao Tzu worked out the view that the individual and his happiness
was the key unit of society. If social institutions hampered the
individual's flowering and his happiness, then those institutions
should be reduced or abolished altogether. To the individualist
Lao Tzu, government, with its "laws and regulations more numerous
than the hairs of an ox," was a vicious oppressor of the individual,
and "more to be feared than fierce tigers." Government, in sum,
must be limited to the smallest possible minimum; "inaction" became
the watchword for Lao Tzu, since only inaction of government can
permit the individual to flourish and achieve happiness. Any intervention
by government, he declared, would be counterproductive, and would
lead to confusion and turmoil. The first political economist to
discern the systemic effects of government intervention, Lao Tzu,
after referring to the common experience of mankind, came to his
penetrating conclusion: "The more artificial taboos and restrictions
there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished —
The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more
thieves and robbers there will be."
The worst
of government interventions, according to Lao Tzu, was heavy taxation
and war. "The people hunger because theft superiors consume an
excess in taxation" and, "where armies have been stationed, thorns
and brambles grow. After a great war, harsh years of famine are
sure to follow."
The wisest
course is to keep the government simple and inactive, for then
the world "stabilizes itself."
As Lao Tzu
put it: "Therefore, the Sage says: I take no action yet the people
transform themselves, I favor quiescence and the people right
themselves, I take no action and the people enrich themselves—"
Deeply pessimistic,
and seeing no hope for a mass movement to correct oppressive government,
Lao Tzu counseled the now familiar Taoist path of withdrawal,
retreat, and limitation of one's desires.
Two centuries
later, Lao Tzu's great follower Chuang Tzu (369–c.286 BC)
built on the master's ideas of laissez-faire to push
them to their logical conclusion: individualist anarchism. The
influential Chuang Tzu, a great stylist who wrote in allegorical
parables, was therefore the first anarchist in the history of
human thought. The highly learned Chuang Tzu was a native of the
state of Meng (now probably in Honan province), and also descended
from the old aristocracy. A minor official in his native state,
Chuang Tzu's fame spread far and wide throughout China, so much
so that King Wei of the Ch'u kingdom sent an emissary to Chuang
Tzu bearing great gifts and urging him to become the king's chief
minister of state. Chuang Tzu's scornful rejection of the king's
offer is one of the great declarations in history on the evils
underlying the trappings of state power and the contrasting virtues
of the private life:
A thousand
ounces of gold is indeed a great reward, and the office of
chief minister is truly an elevated position. But have you,
sir, not seen the sacrificial ox awaiting the sacrifices at
the royal shrine of state? It is well cared for and fed for
a few years, caparisoned with rich brocades, so that it will
be ready to be led into the Great Temple. At that moment,
even though it would gladly change places with any solitary
pig, can it do so? So, quick and be off with you! Don't sully
me. I would rather roam and idle about in a muddy ditch, at
my awn amusement, than to be put under the restraints that
the ruler would impose. I will never take any official service,
and thereby I will [be free] to satisfy my own purposes.
Chuang Tzu
reiterated and embellished Lao Tzu's devotion to laissez-faire
and opposition to state rule: "There has been such a thing as
letting mankind alone; there has never been such a thing as governing
mankind [with success]." Chuang Tzu was also the first to work
out the idea of "spontaneous order," independently discovered
by Proudhon in the nineteenth century, and developed by F.A. von
Hayek of the Austrian School in the twentieth. Thus, Chuang Tzu:
"Good order results spontaneously when things are let alone."
But while
people in their "natural freedom" can run their lives very well
by themselves, government rules and edicts distort that nature
into an artificial Procrustean bed. As Chuang Tzu wrote, "The
common people have a constant nature; they spin and are clothed,
till and are fed — it is what may be called their 'natural
freedom.'" These people of natural freedom were born and died
themselves, suffered from no restrictions or restraints, and were
neither quarrelsome nor disorderly. If rulers were to establish
rites and laws to govern the people, "it would indeed be no different
from stretching the short legs of the duck and trimming off the
long legs of the heron" or "haltering a horse." Such rules would
not only be of no benefit, but would work great harm. In short,
Chuang Tzu concluded, the world "does simply not need governing;
in fact it should not be governed."
Chuang Tzu,
moreover, was perhaps the first theorist to see the state as a
brigand writ large: "A petty thief is put in jail. A great brigand
becomes a ruler of a State." Thus, the only difference between
state rulers and out-and-out robber chieftains is the size of
their depredations. This theme of ruler-as-robber was to be repeated,
as we have seen, by Cicero, and later by Christian thinkers in
the Middle Ages, though of course these were arrived at independently.
Taoist thought
flourished for several centuries, culminating in the most determinedly
anarchistic thinker, Pao Ching-yen, who lived in the early fourth
century AD, and about whose life nothing is known. Elaborating
on Chuang-Tzu, Pao contrasted the idyllic ways of ancient times
that had had no rulers and no government with the misery inflicted
by the rulers of the current age. In the earliest days, wrote
Pao, "there were no rulers and no officials. [People] dug wells
and drank, tilled fields and ate. When the sun rose, they went
to work; and when it set, they rested. Placidly going their ways
with no encumbrances, they grandly achieved their own fulfillment."
In the stateless age, there was no warfare and no disorder:
Where
knights and hosts could not be assembled there was no warfare
afield — Ideas of using power for advantage had not yet
burgeoned. Disaster and disorder did not occur. Shields and spears
were not used; city walls and moats were not built — People
munched their food and disported themselves; they were carefree
and contented.
Into this idyll
of peace and contentment, wrote Pao Ching-yen, there came the violence
and deceit instituted by the state. The history of government is
the history of violence, of the strong plundering the weak. Wicked
tyrants engage in orgies of violence; being rulers they "could give
free rein to all desires." Furthermore, the government's institutionalization
of violence meant that the petty disorders of daily life would be
greatly intensified and expanded on a much larger scale. As Pao
put it:
Disputes
among the ordinary people are merely trivial matters, for what
scope of consequences can a contest of strength between ordinary
fellows generate? They have no spreading lands to arouse avarice
— they wield no authority through which they can advance
their struggle. Their power is not such that they can assemble
mass followings, and they command no awe that might quell [such
gatherings] by their opponents. How can they compare with a
display of the royal anger, which can deploy armies and move
battalions, making people who hold no enmities attack states
that have done no wrong?
To the common
charge that he has overlooked good and benevolent rulers, Pao replied
that the government itself is a violent exploitation of the weak
by the strong. The system itself is the problem, and the
object of government is not to benefit the people, but to control
and plunder them. There is no ruler who can compare in virtue with
a condition of non-rule.
Pao Ching-yen
also engaged in a masterful study in political psychology by pointing
out that the very existence of institutionalized violence by the
state generates imitative violence among the people. In a happy
and stateless world, declared Pao, the people would naturally turn
to thoughts of good order and not be interested in plundering their
neighbors. But rulers oppress and loot the people and "make them
toil without rest and wrest away things from them endlessly." In
that way, theft and banditry are stimulated among the unhappy people,
and arms and armor, intended to pacify the public, are stolen by
bandits to intensify their plunder. "All these things are brought
about because there are rulers." The common idea, concluded Pao,
that strong government is needed to combat disorders among the people,
commits the serious error of confusing cause and effect.
The only Chinese
with notable views in the more strictly economic realm was the distinguished
second century B.C. historian, Ssu-ma Ch'ien (145-c.90 BC). Ch'ien
was an advocate of laissez-faire, and pointed out that
minimal government made for abundance of food and clothing, as did
the abstinence of government from competing with private enterprise.
This was similar to the Taoist view, but Ch'ien, a worldly and sophisticated
man, dismissed the idea that people could solve the economic problem
by reducing desires to a minimum. People, Ch'ien maintained, preferred
the best and most attainable goods and services, as well as ease
and comfort. Men are therefore habitual seekers after wealth.
Since Ch'ien
thought very little of the idea of limiting one's desires, he was
impelled, far more than the Taoists, to investigate and analyze
free market activities. He therefore saw that specialization and
the division of labor on the market produced goods and services
in an orderly fashion:
Each man
has only to be left to utilize his own abilities and exert his
strength to obtain what he wishes — When each person works
away at his own occupation and delights in his own business,
then like water flowing downward, goods will naturally flow
ceaselessly day and night without being summoned, and the people
will produce commodities without having been asked.
To Ch'ien,
this was the natural outcome of the free market. "Does this not
ally with reason? Is it not a natural result?" Furthermore, prices
are regulated on the market, since excessively cheap or dear prices
tend to correct themselves and reach a proper level.
But if the
free market is self-regulating, asked Ch'ien perceptively, "what
need is there for government directives, mobilizations of labor,
or periodic assemblies?" What need indeed?
Ssu-ma
Ch'ien also set forth the function of entrepreneurship on the market.
The entrepreneur accumulates wealth and functions by anticipating
conditions (i.e., forecasting) and acting accordingly. In short,
he keeps "a sharp eye out for the opportunities of the times."
Finally, Ch'ien
was one of the world's first monetary theorists. He pointed out
that increased quantity and a debased quality of coinage by government
depreciates the value of money and makes prices rise. And he saw
too that government inherently tended to engage in this sort of
inflation and debasement.
Copyright
© 2012 by the Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided
full credit is given.
The
Best of Murray Rothbard
|