Was Confucius an anarchist?

[an anarchist]

Confucianism has been described as a political philosophy rather than a religion. When studying Confucianism, I have come to identify him as an anarchist.
The translator/author of the book of Confucian texts says this in his introduction : The Analects reports the conversation as follows: “Someone asked Confucius ‘Why don’t you go into the government?’ And Confucius replied ‘Is it not said in the Book of History concerning filial piety that the King of Chen was a good son and a good brother and then he applied the principles to the government of things? This is also being in the government. Why, therefore, should I go into the government?” Confucius was almost an anarchist, believing as his highest political ideal in a society of people living in moral harmony which should make government itself unnecessary. This is implied in him saying “In acting as a judge at lawsuits, I am as good as anyone. But the thing is, to aim so that there should not be any lawsuits at all.”
I believe Confucianism is one of the earliest iterations of anarchist philosophy.
I believe another variation of early anarchist philosophy is in the Bible, but that’s worth its own thread.

People have said that Confucianism is a state idealizing religion which says an emperor should be in charge. With surface level research, this may seem to be the case. However, the whole point in Confucius advocating for loyalty to the emperor is a layered concept.

The Analects are a collection of direct quotes from Confucius. Many lack context. Below, I’ll quote several aphorisms that relate to his view on government.

Confucius said “Guide the people with governmental measures and control or regulate them by the threat of punishment, and the people will try to keep out of jail, but will have no sense of honor or shame. Guide the people by virtue and control or regulate them by li, and the people while have a sense of honor and respect.

Baron K’ang Ch’i asked Confucius concerning government, saying, “If I kill off the bad citizens, and associate with the good citizens, what do you think?” Confucius replied “What’s the need of killing off people on the part of the ruler of a country? If you desire what is good, the people will become good also. The character of the ruler is like the wind, and the character of the common people is like the grass, and the grass bends in the direction of the wind.”

Confucius said, “When the ruler himself does what is right, he will have influence over the people without giving commands, and when the ruler does not do what is right, all his commands will be of no avail.”

Confucius said, “If a ruler rectifies his own conduct, government is an easy matter, and if he does not rectify his own conduct, how can he rectify others?”

I believe Confucianism relies on the Taoist concept, Wei Wu Wei: to do without doing.
Anarcho-capitalism theorizes of a spontaneous order. In absence of a government, the free market would spontaneously create societal order. I think these concepts are in the same vein.
I think anarchism is an all-encompassing philosophy, and I believe it is taught in sacred texts.
People have told me Confucius isn’t anarchist, I wanted to make this thread to argue that Confucianism is an early iteration of anarchism.
Confucianism teaches that all one simply needs to do to change the world is be a good son and a good younger brother. Getting involved in government positions is useless, according to Confucius. He spent most of his life trying to become a politician in an attempt to make social order, and he denounced this path as a valid path when he was old.

 

[PureX]

I believe Confucianism relies on the Taoist concept, Wei Wu Wei: to do without doing.
Anarcho-capitalism theorizes of a spontaneous order. In absence of a government, the free market would spontaneously create societal order. I think these concepts are in the same vein.
I think anarchism is an all-encompassing philosophy, and I believe it is taught in sacred texts.
People have told me Confucius isn’t anarchist, I wanted to make this thread to argue that Confucianism is an early iteration of anarchism.
Confucianism teaches that all one simply needs to do to change the world is be a good son and a good younger brother. Getting involved in government positions is useless, according to Confucius. He spent most of his life trying to become a politician in an attempt to make social order, and he denounced this path as a valid path when he was old.

Taoism is not a political strategy. It is a personal philosophy. It is about how a human being exists in and relates himself to the world. It is not about how humans should or should not organize themselves to attain some goal.

Also, anarchy is not a philosophical position, nor a political strategy. It's a state of social chaos. And history has shown us that when such a state manifests, great suffering and death come with it, as man's humanity is lost to the animal nature, within. Please do not fool yourself into thinking that anarchy is some idealized natural human state. It is the horrific reality of what we humans become when we forfeit the mechanisms by which we retain our humanity.

 

[Kooky]

I think an anarchist interpretation of Confucius is a bit of a reach. The man was certainly fond of his hierarchies, and a lot of Confucian concepts seem to imply a certain divine order or hierarchy that I would argue shouldn't be present in an anarchist philosophy.

Anarcho-capitalism certainly stands in opposition to both anarchist and Confucian ideas, I would say, given that it necessarily relies on the exercise of organized violence in protection of capital.

With that said, capitalism certainly does lend itself to the kind of hierarchical worldview present in Confucianism, what with the accumulation of capital creating a "natural" order of haves and have nots, with the people at the bottom forced into subservience, much like they used to be in Imperial China. Though here, again, capitalism necessarily relies on force to achieve a hierarchy of capital and labor, as harmony and stasis* would be abhorrent to capital (capital can only accumulate if there is growth, after all).

*edit