REDISTRIBUTING WEALTH 327
probably far less important than the power relations in the villages and the lax-
ity of administration by clerks. Nonetheless, as we will see in the next chapter,
both Tasan and So Yugu, scholars whom Kim also regarded as the most pro-
gressive writers on the land question in the early nineteenth century, also advo-
cated the idea of replacing the kyol-hu system of measurement with the kyong-mu
system, and both attemptcd to use the well-field model as a basis for their pro-
posals for the gradual reform of the land system.
Royal Leadership and Popular ObedienceYu had now come to the point where he had demolished every alternative to the
abolition of private propcrty and the nationalization of land, his kongjon sys-
tem. A kongjon system might be as difficult to implement at first, not only because
of the problem of confiscation and redistribution, but also hecause Yu had assumed
that the task of redefining land boundaries with the proper dikes and ridges would
take about six or seven years to complete.^46 Nevertheless, in addition to achiev-
ing the same objective as a survey and census, it would also "equalize and make
uniform the rich and the poor:' thus gaining the willing compliance of the mass
of the people. Once fixed in place a kongjon system would provide the kind of
constancy that was lacking in life itself: "Human beings are sometimes active
and sometimes at rcst; they live and they die, so that things are never the same.
It is not like land which once fixed never changes."47 Installing a kongjon sys-
tem would require a "single great effort that would result in perpetual ease [illo
yong'ilJ."48 Since it was a system that would produce the most conformity, sim-
plicity, and security, there was no reason it could not be carried out. And because
it had been deemed by sage kings of yore not only as the best. but the only pos-
sihle system to ensure good government, all that was needed was an enlight-
ened ruler to carry it out:When [sage] emperors and kings ruled the states of the world, they had no other
method than this. If [the rulers] of the later age in the end were not able to carry
it out, in the last analysis it only meant that there was no hope for good govern-
ment. If a brave and intelligent ruler were holdly to implement it, there would be
no difference between ancient times and the present, no difference between the
civilized and barbarian [/nva-i]. In essence, there would be no reason why it
could not be carried OUt.^49But what if the great landowners held fast to their private lands and refused
to conform willingly to confiscation? Would Yu then say, as he had with regard
to slavery, that the custom of private property was too fmnly entrenched to he
eliminated at one fell swoop? Would he relegate public ownership to an indef-
inite future and seek a compromise with existing circumstances on the grounds
of practicality? By no means, was his reply, because adoption of the kongjon
system would depend ultimately on the character of the mler and his ministers.