Legalism

Legalism was a school of thought derived, but different, from Xun Zi's thinking.  For Xun Zi, natural laws existed, and rulers must conform to them.  Mastering the specific rules governing myriad things was for Xun Zi fathoming the Way.  For his students such as Han Fei Zi/Tzu (d.233 BC) and Li Si/SSu, they developed this idea of natural laws to a new height, stripping them of the moral content that Xun Zi still attached to them.  For Han Fei, three factors were paramount in government administration: power/authority, statecraft, and laws.  (Fung, 157-158)  Fung attributes this greater emphasis on realpolitik to the growing chaos of society (12 years after Han's death, the kingdom of Qin/Chin that he worked for unified China and established the Qin/Chin Dynasty, the first empire in Chinese history, ending the Warring States Era).  Han Fei is considered a prominent representative of the Legalist school of thought, so called because this school emphasized the use of law.  The Legalist School, however, was short-lived, and did not survive the end of the Qin Dynasty.  Their members, however, continued to be discussed in Chinese writings later on.

Han Fei is considered a great thinker in Chinese history.  He also wrote with wit and style.  The parable he used to illustrate the need for change, about a man waiting for hares to crash themselves onto a tree after one hare did so, (Fung, 159) has become a proverb to mean passivity in the face of events.  This indicates one other area of break from the Confucians: while the latter looked backward to the Golden Past, the Legalists emphasized a forward look and change based on realistic calculations. 

Legalism and "do-nothingness"

Fung comments that the Legalists seemed to champion the philosophy of "do-nothingness" that the Daoists also championed.  They, however, meant something very different.  While Lao Zi meant conformity to the rules of nature, Han Fei believed set rules followed each government position.  The ruler did not need to improvise new rules, but just have his officials follow the rules that corresponded with the "name" of their offices (where the Confucian "rectification of names" got applied--perform the duties of the office according to the name of the office). (Fung, 161)  Hence the ruler, to Han Fei, needed to "do nothing" (more than being reported to and nodding, when his subordinates performed their duties properly, presumably).  In that sense, Legalism is not just about applying laws, but also the recognition of the world/state/society operating on rules that are irrelevant to human morality or human moral examples.

Legalism and egalitarianism

Because Legalism was a remedy to social chaos and the difficulty of administering a rapidly changing society, where the predominant concern was social stability and the stability of the ruler's position before the preservation of any social classes, the harshness of their laws were directed indiscriminately against every one, including the nobility.  This was different from the previous rule in the Zhou Dynasty that penal laws would not be applied to the nobility, whose communication and regulation would depend on their observance of the li (rituals and decorum), and laws could only be applied to the commoners. (Fung, 155)  Before the law, every one was equal.  This legal egalitarianism had a very strong middle class overtone, and contrasted sharply with the Confucian approach to social hierarchy and reform through rituals and decorum.  The Confucian social order, after all, still relied on, if not the nobles, at least the traditions of the nobles, and the furtherance of an elite culture, replete with elaborate genteel behavior, that would seem too feeble to control a chaotic state in the 3rd century B.C., the century of the Legalists.