Yang Zhu’s Egoism Is the Sprout of Capitalism

These days I’ve been reading Rawls’s A Theory of Justice. Rawls puts forward justice as the criterion for sustaining a social system, and in order to develop his argument he criticizes classical utilitarianism. And suddenly a thought struck me.

Could it be that Yang Zhu’s egoism was an argument similar to utilitarianism?

My reasons (?) are as follows.

First, it draws criticism similar to that leveled at utilitarianism. The criticism of Yang Zhu and the criticism of utilitarianism share something in common: namely, that they care only about themselves. Yang Zhu put it this way: “Even if you do not work for others and pursue only your own interest, the world will govern itself.” Let’s focus on the claim that “the world will govern itself.” It seems similar to the logic of capitalist economics, in which the individual’s pursuit of self-interest ultimately becomes the benefit of society as a whole. If we take utilitarianism to be the thought that underpins capitalism, then there is a possibility that egoism can be reduced to utilitarianism. And that is not all. Utilitarianism is often criticized for being unable to distinguish the relative gravity of matters. The same is true of Yang Zhu and his school. Mencius cursed Yang Zhu as someone for whom a single hair of his own body mattered more than the benefit of the entire world. But as is shown in the “Yang Zhu” chapter of the Liezi, such criticism is not a fair assessment of Yang Zhu. Yang Zhu merely argued that if people naturally followed their desires in accordance with human nature, it would benefit the world as well.

Second, he is commonly set in contrast with Mozi. Mencius, in righteous indignation, cried out that the doctrines of Yang Zhu and Mozi had filled the world. In other writings of that era too, Yang Zhu and Mozi are always referred to as a pair. Of course, this may have been because both schools flourished, but it could also have been because the arguments of Yang Zhu and Mozi were diametrically opposed. In fact, the “Yang Zhu” chapter of the Liezi is a debate between the Mohist and Yangist schools. By binding together and naming opposing arguments as a pair, an antithetical parallel is formed. Here I want to draw attention to the fact that Mozi is also sometimes treated as a sprout of communism. Don’t you get a sense of déjà vu about the Cold War of the twentieth century from the spectacle of two sides criticizing each other as “a commie who doesn’t even acknowledge his own parents and brothers” and “a capitalist who cares only about himself”? If this is true, it’s a frightening thing.

Based on the two reasons above, I dare to put forward a theory of embryonic capitalism in the Spring and Autumn and Warring States period.

Of course, since Yang Zhu’s arguments have not been handed down to later generations, all of the above can only be delusions inside my own head. But who knows. Perhaps some Chinese farmer will dig up a bamboo slip while plowing his field… I’ll wait for that day.

20190927