Hegemony is an immoral form of governance that only breeds further conflict—only governance rooted in benevolence can sustain peace and welfare.

Indeed, the hegemon’s state has no equal, its people cannot be defeated, nor its land taken, in most instances. 59 At least initially, it appears that there is nothing that would necessarily preclude the hegemon from instituting a political structure of the sort that would allow for community (qun). That is, such a ruler could certainly set allotments (fen) , dividing up goods as well as making distinctions in social status. Further, if Xunzi is right about the consequences of such a social structure, then it seems that the people of the hegemon’s state will benefit just as much from it as the people of the true king’s state. However, Xunzi, unlike his predecessor Shang Yang or his later contemporary HAN Fei , was not a state consequentialist. Xunzi, in his political thought, is not concerned solely with the state, but is rather concerned with the whole world, ‘all under Heaven.’ And, he makes it clear that the term ‘all under Heaven’ is not coextensive with the state when he argues, “When the foundation is fixed, then the state will be fixed; when the state is fixed, then all under Heaven will be fixed” (HKCS 11/49/19–20; H 99.29–32). This evidence, then, might lead us to think of Xunzi as being some sort of ‘all under Heaven’ consequentialist in his political thought, as being concerned with benefitting everyone in the world in a consequentialist fashion. 60 This position has been taken by many scholars of Xunzi, though I argue that such a reading cannot be squared with the textual evidence. If it is the case that Xunzi is an ‘all under Heaven’ consequentialist, then we might begin to see why Xunzi would wish to have a true king over a hegemon. After all, in a description of the true king, Xunzi says, [28] His benevolence ( ren ) towers above all under Heaven. His yi towers above all under Heaven, his awe-inspiring authority towers above all under Heaven. Since his benevolence towers above all under Heaven, no one under Heaven does not have affection for him. Since his yi towers above all under Heaven, no one under Heaven does not honor him. Since his awe-inspiring authority towers above all under Heaven, no one under Heaven dares to oppose him. He uses this unopposed awe-inspiring authority to assist him in his way of making the people submit. Therefore, he succeeds without having to fight. He achieves without attacking, and without the work of weapons and armor, all under Heaven submit. This is one who understands the way of a true king. (HKCS 9/37/14–16; H 73.202–12) Insofar as the hegemon cannot do this, we might begin to see why the hegemon is not a sufficient ruler. A hegemon’s rule will benefit his own state, it might be thought, but his effect outside his own state will not be as comprehensive as Xunzi would wish. At best his word is trusted by other states, but this says nothing about whether the hegemon can actually benefit these other states and their people in any meaningful way. While such a take on the insufficiency of the hegemon might initially seem plausible, a glance back at passage [25] shows us that Xunzi takes the punishments , rewards and promises of the hegemon to be believed by all under Heaven. Furthermore, his might is such as to shake all under Heaven, and, more importantly, “ order and control of all under Heaven advances under him.” As noted earlier, though, there is both a strong and a weak reading of this passage. In the weakest sense, all Xunzi is saying is that insofar as the ruler puts his own state in order, there is more order in the world, while on a strong reading he is saying that the hegemon actually creates order not only in his own state but throughout the world. How Xunzi intends this passage to be taken certainly affects whether an ‘all under Heaven’ consequentialist understanding of Xunzi’s philosophy can lead to an important distinction between the hegemon and the true king from a political standpoint. However, for our purposes, it does not really matter how Xunzi should be read on this issue because, while an interpretation of Xunzi as an ‘all under Heaven’ consequentialist may initially be appealing, it unfortunately rests on the idea that Xunzi is a consequentialist of sorts. This would imply that for Xunzi, maximizing general welfare is the only standard of right and wrong. However, as I have argued above, Xunzi does have numerous nonconsequentialist standards for right and wrong. Note passage [8] above where the Way of the lord is to form community not only by raising, nourishing, arranging, and ordering the people, but also by beautifying and ornamenting them. While the former criteria may very well look consequentialist, the latter—the beautifying and ornamenting of the people—seems to be a distinct, nonconsequentialist, concern for Xunzi. Ornamenting the people seems much closer to Xunzi’s ideas of ritual, and to better fall under Xunzi’s notion of good form ( wen ) that we saw in passages [16], [24], and [25]. Passage [16] is especially instructive, for it was here that Xunzi attacks Mozi for being concerned only with consequences rather than also caring about good form ( wen ) , a distinct area of concern unrelated to mere maximizing good consequences overall. Even though Xunzi is not an ‘all under Heaven’ consequentialist, the fact that benefitting all under Heaven is an important aspect of the true king’s work is sufficient to distinguish him from the hegemon in an important way. Certainly, the hegemon may be able to shake all under Heaven and move order forward, but his fundamental goal is not to bring about good consequences for all under Heaven. The true king is devoted to benevolence and this leads to a concern for all people. The hegemon, however, lacks a concern for benevolence and thus a concern for all people. However, this is not the only way in which the true king differs from the hegemon. Xunzi views the true king as having a transformative power on everyone in the world, and it is to this that we turn to next.