So I decided to put this idea up as an AHC and gave it a week. No one bit, so I decided to give it a go myself, and I'm just about wrapped up. It's not realistic by any means but I enjoyed writing it and I hope it's at least entertaining.So something I've been wondering for the past couple of days: what sort of scenario could see one or more of the Chinese Six Schools (Confucianism, Legalism, Taoism, Mohism, Yin-Yang, and Logicians) mature/evolve into competitive political ideologies (in the modern sense) in the wider East Asian region and eventually beyond? Maybe a different Warlord Period at the latest, or perhaps an earlier fall of the Qing? Of course the ultimate accomplishment of such an ideology would essentially be a reverse PRC scenario, namely a western nation reorganizing along the lines of an eastern ideology. I'd say some strain of Neo-Legalism would be the most likely to achieve such a result.
The very first iterations of this sort of state would be highly unstable. Later versions would have....extraordinarily thorough lists undoubtedly. And that last point is very apt. The answer is massive civil wars of truly horrific proportions.Definitely thought-provoking! If you're interested in expanding on this setting, I'd love to know how they handle political corruption, and whether there's any degree of democracy or accountability. I'm also interested in what counts as "the most extreme possible manner" of carrying out a law. I imagine the list of offenses punishable by death is very long. There's a lot of potential in this setting for an exploration of the question "What happens when the state's all-or-nothing method gets turned against the state itself?"
think of it as a society where communities and culture revolves around different monasteries of philosophical though, but all share this common belief system that is the basis of extremis homeostasis. those who seek out the very opposites to their starting ideologies and do so repeatedly ( as in they don't just shift ideologies once, but more like seek out the alternatives repeatedly and grapples with them) throughout their lives form a "sort" of government in a manner similar to the head of a monastery or the dalai lama. the idea is that those who repeatedly grapple with the various ideologies at the various ends of the spectrum of options have a more complete philosophical view and are less possessively ideological and doctrinal. Or that is one interpretation of the idea.That sounds fascinating! Would make a great setting for a comedy, or for a gritty drama about ruthless political backstabbing. I'm not sure I understand how the system works. Does the state assign people to various groups or schools of thoughts that they consider radical? Is it more spontaneous, with people seeking out these groups on their own? If one of these parties or movements gets too popular, upsetting the delicate balance, does the state step in and reassign people to less popular ideologies?