The case of the Jiangxi Likin stations centers on how Zeng Guofan transformed a temporary tax into a systematic fiscal instrument. In 1855, he established the first interprovincial likin station in Nanchang; while ostensibly "collecting duties by imperial decree," this was in reality an innovative move to bypass the jurisdiction of the Governor of Jiangxi. His act of "collecting taxes beyond his jurisdiction" provoked fierce opposition from Shen Baozhen. The reaction of Jiangxi merchants was even more dramatic: in 1862, medicinal herb merchants from Zhangshu collectively went on strike to protest the high likin taxes, yet three months later, they proactively donated 100,000 taels of silver in exchange for tax exemption privileges. Meanwhile, hemp cloth merchants from Yichun counterfeited "Cantonese merchant" identities to exploit the Xiang Army's preferential tax rates on foreign goods. More dramatic than the Jiangxi merchants was Zeng Guofan himself; in official documents, he praised the Jiangxi merchants as "public-spirited and righteous," while in private letters, he denounced them as "more cunning than the Guangdong bandits." Does this not resonate with Laozi's saying, "When wisdom appears, there is great hypocrisy"? What of Neo-Confucianism? What of the School of Mind? In the face of economics, they all yielded. This question immediately pulls us into the historical scene, filled with human nature and political calculation, like a drama unfolding the博弈 between late Qing government and merchants. There is no concept of "yielding"; there is only the crushing of "Confucian morality" by "Legalist rationality," and the赤裸裸 birth of a new "economics of state behavior" under the logic of survival. In this play, Zeng Guofan performed his "two faces," wearing the mask of a Neo-Confucian scholar-official to conceal his Legalist enforcer's soul. Using "public good" as his rhetoric—"public-spirited and righteous"—became his discursive shell, transforming his近乎 extortionate fundraising activities into a performance of loyalty to the sovereign and love for the country. Yet his private words—"more cunning than the Guangdong bandits"—revealed his冷酷 Legalist judgment. As a frontline commander, he faced the most immediate fiscal pressure: how to feed his army? In his view, the merchants' resistance (strikes) and calculations (rent-seeking, fraud) were, like the Taiping Rebellion, "troubles" hindering his goal of pacifying the empire. His bitter condemnation of the merchants' "cunning" reflected not moral outrage, but frustration at losing absolute control over the "variables." Neo-Confucianism was Zeng Guofan's "banner," while the methods—creating the likin system—were his "gun." Before the "gun barrel" of "suppressing rebellion," all moral doctrines and fiscal norms had to yield to the原始 and残酷 "wartime fiscal economics." Thus, the Jiangxi merchants' "wisdom appeared," and their coping strategies—strikes, rent-seeking, fraud—provided a practical footnote to Laozi's concept of "great hypocrisy." The Zhangshu medicinal merchants transitioned from the "truth" of "collective action"—the strike, which was a genuine resistance based on traditional merchant guilds' regional and industry identity, an attempt to use market power against administrative power—to the "falsehood" of被迫 rent-seeking cooperation. The failure of the three-month strike proved the futility of economic resistance in the face of the state's coercive apparatus. Consequently, the most rational choice was no longer confrontation, but proactive engagement with and utilization of this corrupt system. Donating 100,000 taels of silver was essentially paying a hefty "protection fee" to the authorities to purchase a local monopoly. This marked the transformation of an independent commercial group into a rent-seeking interest group依附 on the likin system. This was institutionalized "falsehood." The Yichun hemp cloth merchants, with their "wisdom" in institutional arbitrage,利用 the Xiang Army's preferential tax rates on foreign goods by adopting "Cantonese merchant" identities, thus achieving "great hypocrisy."
Comments