The Art of Rulership: a Comparative Study of Han Fei Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli’s Political Philosophy

A Research Paper Presented to the Undergraduate Faculty of the
Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies
College of Arts and Sciences
University of San Carlos

In Partial Fulfillment of the
Course Requirement in
Legal Philosophy

James Clyde Castillote Ranario
October 2014

1. Introduction The history of mankind, passed through generations to generations in written and oral accounts, never failed to mention the rise and fall of great civilizations. In every epoch that mankind has gone through, a certain society or culture will always take an honor or disgrace in the center stage of history. This might be an honor credited for an achievement over a magnitude of victory, or a disgrace in a painful experience of defeat. From the earliest known Indian and Chinese civilizations in the East, to the powerful triumvirate of the Egyptian, Greek and Roman civilizations in the West, we can only say of two things — they all gloriously rose and proved to be kingdoms of undaunted power and might, but fall on their knees in bitter shame and demise. Although chronicles of our thousand-year-old history might not be that clear as to foretell the rise and fall of these great civilizations, however we all know that behind the stronghold of these empires, there commands a ruler, a great ruler — A leader that is responsible for meticulously planning the moves and conducts towards the rise of his civilization, and he who must be blamed for every fall and defeat that his polity may yield. A ruler, in any detail of circumstances, brings the name of his civilization. A ruler brings life and, as well, grants death. Thus, from this standpoint, we can ask more deeply. What is it to become a Ruler? How can we say so that a ruler is effective and when he becomes ineffective? And what are the essential qualities that a ruler must have? What does it take to become a ruler in the society? This research paper seeks to address the questions mentioned above. In an endeavor to acquire answers to these questions, the researcher tries to revisit two major works in both philosophical hemispheres. The East would be represented by a much older philosopher in the person of Han Fei Tzu (280-233 BCE), the last and philosophically most sophisticated member of the important school of ancient Chinese Philosophy known as Legalism; while the West would be represented by Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), an Italian statesman and a renaissance philosopher, whose works are pure reflections of the spirit of his time. From these two philosophies, the researcher is going to pull on the threads of similarities and differences regarding the subject, and gradually answer the question, what does it take to become a Ruler in the Society. As a point of departure then, we have to accept one thing, and that is a ruler of a certain society is as important as the society itself. A ruler not just act as the rational part of the society, but serves as an emotional beacon to its entire people. In other words then, the ruler is the heart and soul of a civilization. Take away the ruler, and the society, if not immediately, will gradually cease to exist.

2. Han Fei Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli: A Brief History Han Fei Tzu (280-233 BCE) was born as a prince of a royal family in the state of Han, in present western Henan Province. In other words then, Han Fei is to be considered as a member of an elite or a noble family. In the history of Chinese Philosophy, unlike Confucius (551-479 BCE), Mo Tzu (5th Century BCE), Mencius (371-289 BCE), Chuang Tzu (369-286), and Hsun Tzu (320-230 BCE), Han Fei Tzu was the only nobleman among them. Thus we can say that Han Fei Tzu has more stately responsibilities than the other Chinese philosophers we have known. This stately responsibility would supposedly elevate him to a higher responsibility that is towards rulership, but later on, it turned out to be a primary reason for his death. Han Fei is one of the students of Hsun Tzu, and that one of his fellow students that is worth being noted is Li Ssu (d. 208 BC). Li Ssu is the man who was destined to become prime minister and chief aid to the First Emperor of the Ch’in dynasty and to play a sinister role in Han Fei Tzu’s life. Han Fei is said to stutter when he is talking, but he is a good and able writer. He constantly made compositions, and one of his notable writing is in the form of remonstrance against the ruler of his own state of Han, King An. Han Fei constantly gave the ruler pieces of advices and precautions about the possibility of other states conquering their state, however, King An was not impressed with Han Fei’s advices and simply ignored it. However, coincidentally, Ch’in Shih-huang-ti, the ruler of the powerful state of Ch’in was far more impressed. He was so impressed of Han Fei Tzu, but this admiration never halted the ruler’s hunger for conquering Han Fei’s native state. Eventually, in the pursuit of political supremacy, Ch’in Shih-huang-ti invaded Han in 234 BCE. King An, seeing this as a serious problem towards his state, planned something in the hopes of salvaging the state. The drama came in when an eleventh hour decision from King An appointed Han Fei Tzu as an envoy of the state to Ch’in in the hopes of saving Han from destruction. Han Fei Tzu went to the state of Ch’in and was received with delight by the king. But before he can gain the full trust and confidence of the king, his former fellow student, Li Ssu intervened and had warned the king that Han Fei cannot be trusted because of his loyalty to the royal family of Han. There, the king was persuaded successfully by Li Ssu, and Han Fei was imprisoned. Han Fei Tzu died a similar death with Socrates after he was given a poison to drink. Whether Li Ssu acted out of jealousy, we shall never know. In the life of Han Fei Tzu, one must also see the kind of context where he grew. This is important because this will serve as a key to understanding his way of philosophizing. Han Fei Tzu, as history books would account, was also born, like other great Chinese philosophers, in the period of the warring states. The history of the period is one of constant alliance, counter-alliance, of treaties made and broken, and above all welfare. So basically the concern during this time was on how to establish political stability. Many thinkers before him sought of the idea of Legalism. It flourished and became appealing to Chinese thinkers, and eventually was formalized and become a school in Chinese philosophical tradition. Of all the writings and ideas of political philosophy in ancient China, it is said that Han Fei Tzu’s philosophy is the culmination of Legalism. For some, he is China’s greatest Legalist philosopher. Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527) was a Renaissance Italian statesman, as well as a political philosopher. Being a statesman, Machiavelli worked under the government of Florence until 1512. He entered governmental service in Florence as a clerk and ambassador in 1494, the same year as Florence had restored the republic and expelled the ruling Medici family, and was soon promoted to Second Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, with responsibility for diplomatic negotiations and military matters. Little is known about his life, but one thing that is known to him is his act of preferring the establishment of a citizens’ militia over the mercenary army of the state, what’s more is that he is firm in arguing over the supremacy of the former over the latter. However, when the Medici, an Italian bourgeois family, took over the government and eventually ruled the republic of Florence, Machiavelli was dismissed from his work in the government. When the Medici took the power on 1513, he was accused of conspiracy and he was imprisoned. Machiavelli was a direct victim of a regime change. There, he was tortured for several weeks. His imprisonment ultimately paralyzed Machiavelli’s involvement to the workings of the state, but during those times in prison, his most famous book, The Prince, was born. After some years in prison, Machiavelli was released. Being a known statesman before his imprisonment, he wants to regain his status. He decided to approach the Medici family to ingratiate, in the hopes of having a re-appointment in the government, but he was unsuccessful. Ultimately, his attempts to get in with Medici was viewed with suspicion thus completely stripped him off with the state’s affairs until his death. Like Han Fei Tzu, Machiavelli saw that there is something problematic in the political system during his time. He saw injustice and so much evil in the workings in the state. Thus, his book, which will be later exposed, will be seen as a reflection of what happened during his time.

3. Han Fei Tzu’s Political Philosophy: Hanfeizi As we knew it in the brief history of his life, Han Fei Tzu was born in the period of the warring states. This is a period in ancient China where the true expression of the hunger for supremacy over the other was boldly practiced. Each state conquers other state in search for power and growth; while making the conquered unable to move and in draught. Moreover, even in the state itself, internal commotions are part of the puzzling problems that the ruler and the people cannot escape. For a man who was born during that time, life is definitely difficult. Han Fei Tzu shared the same feeling that life, during his time, is difficult. He suffered but he eased the pains by taking account wisdom, taking time to think of the roots of the problems and on how one may possibly solve it. However, what may seem more difficult to answer is on the questions regarding the state of the state itself. Han Fei Tzu, being a philosopher, dwelt so much on this matter, and eventually gave birth to his own brand of philosophizing. Han Fei Tzu’s political or legal philosophy was born. His book, Hanfeizi, came to life. Han Fei Tzu’s political philosophy sees the importance of a ruler. That’s why in his book, Hanfeizi, it sets out policies and guidelines for producing a strong and stable state and a secure position for its ruler. Moreover, Han Fei Tzu cited three features or themes of political life, which he considered as the key towards the success in politics: the law (fa), the art of conducting political business and of handling people (shu), and power (shih). With these, Han Fei Tzu tried to address the problems on preserving and strengthening the state. Firstly, as regards the law (fa). In Section 6 of Hanfeizi, “On Having Standards”, the first line says “No state is forever strong or forever weak. If those who uphold the law are strong, the state will be is strong; if they are weak, the state will be weak.” This line, as the researcher believes, encapsulates the essence of the first feature of political life. And that is the usage of law. But before going deeper regarding the first theme, let us examine first the reason behind Han Fei’s insistence of the usage of the law. Let us examine the bias behind. Han Fei Tzu claims that human nature is evil. Han Fei adopts this idea from his teacher, Hsun Tsu, and thinks that everyone has a mind of “self-interest” that only calculates one’s own interest in carrying out practice. Thus, from this standpoint, we can say that the period of the warring states was a product of man’s evil nature. That the mishaps and problems in the state are but innate problems that stems from the nature of man, himself. Moreover, Han Fei regards man and human beings, generally, as very unpleasant creatures, viewing man as naturally idle, greedy, cowardly, treacherous, unwise and inconsistent. This is how Han Fei Tzu viewed man and his nature. So now, what can we do to make something positive out of man’s negative nature? The prime means, as Han Fei Tzu would claim, is by the use of the law. Thus, the first feature of a successful political life starts by establishing and obeying the law. In the case of the ruler, he must establish a clear and comprehensive body of law. Law, in this sense then creates order and growth. Thus he says in Section 6, “On Having Standards”:
“In our present age, he who can put an end to private scheming and make men uphold the public law will see his people secure and his state well ordered; he who can block selfish pursuits and enforce the public law will see his armies growing stronger and his enemies weakening. Find men who have a clear understanding of what is beneficial to the nation and a feeling for the systems of laws and regulations, and place them in charge of the lesser officials; then the ruler can never be deceived by lies and falsehoods.” These lines from the Hanfeizi tells us that laws, if properly observe and well addressed to all, from the ruler to the ministers towards the lesser officials, can always make a difference. The bottom line here is that it starts from the ruler. The ruler, being wise, has to make policies and address it effectively for the better of the state. A state without a law will be a chaotic state. And a state with a law, but not properly addressed, will be chaotic as well. So it’s not just making a law, but addressing it properly as well. And as regards the application of the law, the ruler must be wise enough to find wise men, able to understand the laws themselves, so that there is an effective and smooth delivery of the spirit and letter of the law. When this is followed, no doubt, there can be order in the state. As regards the appointments in the state, the ruler has to use the rule of law as well, thus Han Fei Tzu says:
“A truly enlightened ruler uses the law to select men from him; he does not choose them himself, He uses the law to weight their merits; he does not attempt to judge for himself. Hence men of true worth will not be able to hide their talents, nor spoilers to gloss over their faults. Men cannot advance on the basis of praise alone, nor can be driven from court by calumny. Then there will be a clear understanding of values between the ruler and his ministers, and the state can be easily governed. But only if the ruler makes use of law can he hope to achieve this.” At this point, Han Fei Tzu is trying to give us an advice as to the proper administering and appointing of people in the state. Most of the time, as in the case of what is happening nowadays, a ruler tends to appoint people to a certain position mainly because there is something like a connection between the ruler and the person, may it be familial or on the basis of friendship or etc. In other words, the ruler acts through “self-interest”. That should not be the case, as Han Fei insists. The basis for people to be appointed as workers of the state must be based on the law. Criteria set by the law must be the one to look at, not on arbitrary basis. Therefore, as Han Fei Tzu further suggests, “the way of the enlightened ruler is to unify the laws instead of seeking for wise men of good faith. His laws never [fail] him, and there is no felony or deceit among his officials.” Lastly, Han Fei Tzu points out that “[l]aws are the means of prohibiting error and ruling out selfish motives; while strict penalties are the means of enforcing orders and disciplining inferiors.” Laws as means of prohibiting errors can be an aid to Han Fei Tzu’s conception of human nature as evil. Since man’s evil nature allows him to commit mistakes, the law is there as the one that corrects it. Han Fei added that for correcting the faults of superiors, chastising the misdeeds of the subordinates, restoring order, exposing error, checking excess, remedying evil, and unifying the standard of the people, nothing can compare to law. Moreover, it should be noted that the law is the only source of values permitted in the state. And thus being a value, the ruler must have a strong grip of the law, for the law, being one of the three themes of Legalistic politics as well, may cause success in one’s political life. Secondly, as regards the art of conducting political business and of handling people (shu). Knowing how to govern the state is important as the state itself. It is important in the sense that the way the ruler governs his state determines the state’s life and death. So, how should a ruler do the art of good governance? Is good governance a part of the law? Han Fei in the Section 7, “The Two Handles”, of his book Hanfeizi, tells us the two ways a ruler must handle his ministers and the state. He said:
“The enlightened ruler controls his ministers by means of two handles alone. The two handles are punishment and favor. What do I mean by punishment and favor? To inflict mutilation and death on men is called punishment; to bestow honor and reward is called favor.” The act of giving rewards and the act of punishment are two of the inseparable actions that the ruler must exercise. The ruler must exercise it in the sense that it is bounded by the law. Since it is bounded by the law, any inactivity in the part of the ruler must be seen as not following the rule of law. In the previous subject, talking about the law, the researcher stressed the need of the ruler to have a strong grasp of it. This time, the ruler must also have a strong grip on shu or the methods of government. This is important for the ruler so as to accomplish his own purposes and thwart of his enemies that are both inside and outside the state. When we go further to understanding the methods of good governance by Han Fei, there is a portion in his ideology that is somehow related to some Chinese philosophical traditions. For instance:
“The ministers come forward to present their proposals; the ruler assigns them tasks on the basis of their words, and then concentrates on demanding the accomplishment of the task. If the accomplishment fits the task, and the task fits the words, then he bestows reward; but if they do not match, he doles out punishment. Hence if one of the ministers comes forward with big words but produces only small accomplishments, the ruler punishes him, not because the accomplishments are small, but because they do not match the name that was given to the undertaking…” Following this guideline, we can say that Han Fe’s advice is strict. What’s more is that if you can notice, this guideline is actually related to some principles of the School of Names. The guideline suggests that there must be a particular relationship between the forms and names. If you say this, you do this. If you say that, you do that. In other words, Han Fei Tzu wants us to be true to what we say. On Section 5, The Way of the Ruler, Han Fei Tzu sad: “It is the way of the enlightened ruler never to allow his ministers to speak words that cannot be matched by results.” All in all, the concept is easy to understand: rewarding those who are worthy and punishing those who deserved. The ruler must reward those who exerted effort, accomplished the work base on what they commit; the ruler must punish those who exerted effort, though accomplished the work but not in what they commit. That is how things must be done in the state. The two handles, the second feature of political life, as presented by Han Fei Tzu, is indeed a powerful tool in having good governance. It is included in the law and that the ruler has all the rights to practice it. The last theme of legalistic political way, power, brings out the gravity of the two handles. Thirdly, as regards power (shih). At exactly the last sentence of Section 8 of Hanfeizi, Wielding Power, Han Fei Tzu stressed that “[t]he ruler himself should posses the power, wielding it like lightning or like thunder.” This connotes an invitation that the ruler, given the power, has to vigorously enforce the two handles by exactly giving rewards to those who are worthy and to give punishment those who deserved. In other words, the practice of shih cements the grip of a ruler into a certain state. However, Han Fei Tzu made an advice as to how power should be possessed by the ruler. He said, “[d]o not let your power be seen; be blank and motionless.” The point here of Han Fei is to tell the ruler not to be so exposing of the power that he has because too much disclosure may lead to others taking an advantage on him—taking advantage in the sense that the nemesis might find a way on how to get the power and position in the ruler. When the subjects become familiar with the limits of the ruler, his power might be seized. So, the ruler in a way must practice moderation, and by moderation it means applying concealment. Ministers and common people should not understand such thoughts. In this way, a ruler can secretly control ministers and force them to fear him because they never know his real intentions. After all, Han Fei said, “[s]earch out the hearts of others, seize their power from them.” So basically, these are the three features of political life in a legalist way of dealing the state. The ruler, being the head of a state, must possess and practice law (fa), good governance (shu), and power (shih). Combining the three sums up a successful political life, as Han Fei Tzu would point out.

4. Niccolo Machiavelli’s Political Philosophy: The Prince Niccolo Machiavelli’s political philosophy is amongst those that are widely interpreted. Some philosophers tend to agree among themselves, while others do not. As to the many interpretations about his political philosophy, the researcher would not anymore mind presenting it. However, of the many interpretations, a moderate view will be adopted by the researcher and that be Niccolo Machiavelli is instructing the ruler that the most effective way to preserving the state is by the use of power, and that the only real concern of the political ruler is the acquisition and maintenance of it. Thus, in his most famous book, The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli seeks to teach the rules of political power. Moreover, he postulated that power naturally defines any political activity, and hence it is necessary for any successful ruler to know how power is to be used. What’s more, only by means of the proper application of power, Machiavelli believes, can individuals be brought to obey and will the ruler be able to maintain the state in safety and security. Like Han Fei Tzu, Machiavelli believes that human beings have this self-interested nature. And during his time, man’s self-interested nature was very observable in the political workings of the state. Thus, to purge this seemingly defect in human nature, Machiavelli subscribes to the usage of law and power. In Chapter 12 of his book The Prince, “On the Various Kinds of Troops and Mercenary Soldiers”, he said:
“We have said above that a prince must have laid firm foundations; otherwise he will of necessity come to grief. And the principal foundations of all states, the new as well as the old or mixed, are good laws and good armies. And since there cannot exist good laws where there are no good armies, and where there are good armies there must be good laws.” Here, we are told of the basic things that the ruler must have to govern well. These basic things are important to the ruler and the state, or else, as Machiavelli pointed out, the ruler may come to grief. Machiavelli points out making of law and creation of militia as the principal foundations of all the states. The ruler must have laws, and he must organize an army. The laws are for the regulation of the state, while the army is to carry out the power in the state. But laws, as stated, should not only be laws but good laws so that the ruler may also come out good armies. Now, concerning the way a prince should govern, he said in Chapter 15, “On Those Things for Which Men, and Particularly Princes, are Praised or Blamed”:
“Now there remains to be examined what should be the methods and procedures of a prince in dealing with his subjects and friends […] it is necessary for a prince who wishes to maintain his position to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge or not to use it according to necessity […] I say that all men, when they are spoken of, and particularly princes, since they are placed on the higher level, are judged by some qualities which bring them either blame or praise. And this is why one is considered generous, another miserly; one is considered a giver, the other rapacious; once cruel, another merciful; one treacherous, another faithful; one effeminate and cowardly, another bold and courageous; one humane, another haughty; one lascivious, another chaste; one trustworthy, another frivolous; one religious, another unbelieving; and the like. And I know that everyone will admit that it would be a very praiseworthy thing to find in a prince, of the qualities mentioned above, those that are held to be good; but since it is neither possible to have them nor to observe them all completely, because the human condition does not permit it, a prince must be prudent enough to know how to escape the bad reputation of those vices that would lose the state for him […]” In this line, we are told that the prince, the ruler, in a way of governing the state must learn not to be good. Why not to be good? Because in the first place our human condition, or to simply call it nature, does not permit, or at least brings out, the goodness in us. So, man by nature is not good. Thus, the prince in order to deal with this truth must also learn not to be good. What Machiavelli is trying to say here is that the prince must conquer the evil in the state by becoming evil himself. Moreover, it does not only make him a conqueror of the evils in the state, but such ruthlessness may earn the prince the reputation of being feared. Another one, in Chapter 17, “On Cruelty and Mercy, and whether it is better to be loved than to be Feared or the Contrary”, he said:
“Therefore, a prince must not worry about the reproach of cruelty when it is a matter of keeping his subjects united and loyal; for with a very few examples of cruelty he will be more compassionate than those who, out of excessive mercy, permit disorders to continue, from which arise murders and plundering; for these usually harm the community at large, while the executions that come from the prince harm particular individuals […] A prince must nevertheless make himself feared in such a manner that he will avoid hatred, even if he does not acquire love; since to be feared and not be hated can very well combined […] I concluded, therefore, that returning to the problem of being feared and loved, that since men love at their own pleasure and fear at the pleasure of the prince, a wise prince should build his foundation upon that which belongs to him.” So here, in the first few lines, we are confronted of two contrasting options, to be cruel or to be merciful. The former implies a negative meaning while the latter says something positive. For Machiavelli, he insists that a ruler must be cruel. This might sound so negative, but as the excerpt would explain, a prince that is cruel banners a practical approach, at least in the context of his time, to ending evils in the state. If a ruler becomes too merciful, he cannot harm anybody but disorder would still exist, but if the ruler holds on power and become cruel, he may harm a particular individual but rest assured that the disorder will cease to exist. The prince’s cruelty seeks to stop the replication of evil in the state. Now, as regards the choice between to be loved or to be feared, Machiavelli says that the ruler must choose to be feared. The idea is simple and it says that if a ruler is being feared then nobody would dare to oppose whatever plans and actions that the ruler may take. Eventually, the ruler gains respect by being feared. For Machiavelli, love is weak, love does not guarantee as a means for the ruler to have grip to the people of the state. Moreover, man, having a bad nature, cannot be relied to hold on love all the time, but the possibility of its opposite, hatred, can be and more likely to be anticipated. And to be hated must be avoided by the prince. To further cement the relationship between the law and power, Machiavelli in Chapter 18, “How a Prince Should Keep his Word,” told us:
“You must, therefore, know that there are two types of fighting; one according to the laws; the other with force; the first way is proper to man, the second to the beasts, but because the first, in many cases is not sufficient, it becomes necessary to have recourse to the second.” Here, Machiavelli made it clear that laws and force or power are two of the fundamental principles that the ruler must have to governing the state. The law, originally meant for man, must be combined by force if the need arises. The metaphor of the best means that when the state becomes too evil power has to be used together with the law. Now, the ruler, having known the basic principles as foundations for good governance, how can he deal with the passage of time, how can he deal with fortune in the state’s affairs, or simply to say how can he deal with fate. The Chapter 25 of his book, “On Fortune’s Role in Human Affairs and How She Can be Dealt With,” says:
“[…] in order that our free will be not extinguished, I judge it to be true that fortune is the arbiter of one half of our actions, but that she still leaves the control of the other half, or almost that, to us. And I compare her to one of those ruinous rivers that, when they become enraged, flood the plains […] unable to oppose them in any way. But although they are of such nature, it does not follow that when the weather is calm we cannot take precautions […] she shows her force where there is no organized strength to resist her […] therefore, the cautious man, when it is time to act impetuously, does not know how to do so, and he is ruined; but if he had changed his conduct with the times, fortune would not have changed […] I am certainly convinced of this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman, and it is necessary in order to keep her down, to beat her and to struggle with her. And it is seen that she more often allows herself to be taken over by men who are impetuous than by those who make cold advances […]” Here, Machiavelli recognized that the fate of the state depends on fortune, which is metaphorically represented as a woman, and on the action of the ruler himself. The ruler should recognize that fortune comes in her own way. She can cause destruction and harm to the state, but the ruler, being wise, may do something before she comes. That’s why the ruler must take precautions before she comes, and the ruler must do it in an impetuous manner. Fortune, being a woman can be overcome. And as the metaphor goes, she lets herself be overcome by the bold, fearless, conduct rather the one that is fully and weak. All in all, the ruler may control fortune, and he must do that in a manner that uses force, being impetuous in his actions. So this is the political philosophy of Niccolo Machiavelli. Believing that there is so much evil in the state’s affairs, he insisted that there must stand as an absolute ruler. And that ruler must consider the use of law and the use of power as the fundamental political principles of the state.

5. Conclusion Indeed, Han Fei Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli shared the same idea on the grounds of political philosophy. Firstly, the two philosophers agree that human nature is originally bad. Han Fei and Niccolo, during their times, both saw the magnitude of evil that prevailed from man’s very nature. The former experienced a difficult life during the Period of the Warring States, while the latter suffered from so much malevolence in his state. Coincidentally, these two philosophers are statesmen. They both have stately responsibilities and they aim of lifting up their respective governments. However, even if they have common goals in political life, both met a bitter end out of the bitter system that their respective states are practicing. Secondly, the two philosophers agree that there is a way to alleviate and eventually eradicate the evils in the state. And they propose mainly the use of law and power, with an absolute ruler at the helm. Han Fei Tzu proposes that there is a need to master the practice of law, the art of good governance, and the usage of power. Blend these three elements and the ruler will achieve success in his political life. Niccolo Machiavelli highlights the use of law and power as the fundamental principles of the state. The ruler must establish law and erect a militia by which power can be expressed. The practice of law and the usage of power becomes a tool in controlling man’s nature. Law and power regulates man in particular and the state in general. These two as well are very particular in creating an absolute ruler. By being absolute, it means that the ruler should possess unlimited power transcending even the walls of morality. An absolute ruler must conquer the evils in the state, and he must do that not by the power of goodness, but of the otherwise. Only when the ruler uses the power of evil, itself, can he conquer evil. Han Fei Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli might be distant as to their existence, but they seem to coexist because of their philosophies. The researcher believes that they have contributed a lot in shaping the face of political philosophy, and what’s more certain is that, Han Fei Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli’s ideas shape the Art of Rulership.

6. Bibliography Books

Website

--------------------------------------------
[ 2 ]. Diane Collinson et.al., Fifty Eastern Thinkers (New York: Routledge, 2001), 254
[ 3 ]. Legalism was one of the main philosophic currents during the Warring States Period. The trends that were later called Legalism have in common focus on strengthening the political power of the ruler, of which law is only one part. The most important surviving texts from this tradition are Hanfeizi and The Book of Lord Shang. Legalism was a pragmatic political philosophy that did not address higher questions like the nature and purpose of life. The school’s most famous proponent and contributor, Han Fei Tzu, believed that a ruler should use three tools to govern his subjects. (Wen Haiming, Chinese Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 61)
[ 4 ]. Wen Haiming, Chinese Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 60
[ 5 ]. Basic Writings of Han Fei Tzu, trans. Burton Watson (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963), 2
[ 6 ]. Diane Collinson et.al, 254
[ 7 ]. Basic Writings of Han Fei Tzu, 3
[ 8 ]. Diane Collinson et.al, 254
[ 9 ]. Ibid.
[ 10 ]. “Han Fei Tzu,” Encyclopedia Britannica, Last modified on February 2, 2014, accessed September 1, 2014, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/253934/Han-Feizi
[ 11 ]. Early Modern Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, ed. A.P. Martinich et.al (United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 275
[ 12 ]. “Niccolo Machiavelli”, The Basics of Philosophy, Last modified in 2008, accessed September 6, 2012, http://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_machiavelli.html
[ 13 ]. "Niccolo Machiavelli," Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Last modified in 2009, accessed September 26, 2014, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/#1
[ 14 ]. Basic Writings of Han Fei Tzu, 21
[ 15 ]. Wen Haiming, 60
[ 16 ]. Diane Collinson et.al, 255
[ 17 ]. Basic Writings of Han Fei Tzu, 22
[ 18 ]. Ibid., 24
[ 19 ]. Ibid., 109
[ 20 ]. Ibid., 27
[ 21 ]. Ibid., 28
[ 22 ]. Diane Collinson et.al, 256
[ 23 ]. Basic Writings of Han Fei Tzu, 30
[ 24 ]. Ibid., 32
[ 25 ]. Ibid., 19
[ 26 ]. Ibid., 42
[ 27 ]. Ibid., 39
[ 28 ]. Wen Haiming, 61-62
[ 29 ]. Basic Writing of Han Fei Tzu, 42
[ 30 ]. Early Modern Philosophy: Essential Readings with Commentary, ed. A.P. Martinich et.al, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2007), 275
[ 31 ]. “ Niccolo Machiavelli,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
[ 32 ]. Niccolo Machiavelli, The Prince, trans. Peter Bondanella and Mark Musa (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984), 336
[ 33 ]. Ibid., 338
[ 34 ]. Ibid., 339-340
[ 35 ]. Ibid., 340
[ 36 ]. Ibid., 346-347