~28 LAND REFORMIf we had a king lacking in hright virtue and ministers who all pursued their
own personal benefit and profit, then not only would there he no hope whatso-
ever that this matter could be accomplished, it would even be difficult to pre-
serve the very altars of the state. But if in fact we had a ruler of bright virtue on
the throne and ministers who devoted their minds to the hcnefit of the country,
they could do it ane! manage it and all the people woule! gladly conform to it
with a sincere mindY'Although a few deceitful people might violate the law to profit themselves, most
of the people would not join with them in causing trouble. Those few who did
would be punished. "I have never heard of a case where humane government
was practiced in utmost sincerity [by a ruler of true virtue] where there were
people who caused trouble."5^1
We must pause to take note of Yu's insistence on the need for strong royal
leadership. Despite Yu's commitment to an institutional approach to reform and
his call for the creation of a morally superior sadaehu ruling class, thc above
passages reveal a fundamental Confucian moral faith in the transforming power
of the man of virtue that is reflected even in current Korean attitudes in both
north and south Korea about the positive and dynamic role of the supreme leader
in carrying out economic, social, and political developmentY This is one of the
reasons why Yu's thinking was different from the late Ming and early Ch'ing
statecraft writers like Huang Tsung-hsi and Ku Yen-wu, who were more con-
cerned about the problem of imperial despotism or the abuse of power by a ruler.
Yu, by contrast, sensed the lack of leadership in his own time and was not fear-
ful of the excesses of despotism.
His emphasis on personal leadership, however, should remind us of the dan-
ger of oversimplified interpretations of Korean Confucian political thought. Yu's
ideal system was, after all, a combination of elements that might appear con-
tradictory. His ideal state was to consist of classes and institutions that would
limit arbitrary despotism, and yet the king was to be a true and forceful leader,
not merely a puppet in the hands of a hereditary ruling class.
Yu ended his argument with a theme that repeatedly appears in his writing -
an almost Manichaean dichotomy between the dictates of moral principle and
the desires and compulsions of an imperfect humanity, expressed in the Neo-
Confucian language of the opposition between Heavenly principle (or natural
principle) and human desire (ch alii and inyok).
In all things of the world, there are only two poles worth considering [yangdan]- Heavenly principle and human desire. From the minutest [aspects] of one's
single mind to the most distant affairs of the world, everything is governed by
one rule. If man preserves Heavenly principle, then human desire will retreat by
itself. If he heeds it, hc will have good fortune, and every thing will tum out to
his advantage. Has anyone ever seen a case where a man preserved Heavcnly
principle ane! it caused him harm? What the sages held to he the main thing was