Competition exists in every society, but its nature transforms dramatically when scaled to encompass millions of people under centralized systems.
Modern China presents a striking example of this phenomenon, where 293 million students and 18.8 million teachers operate within a unified educational framework. This massive scale creates an environment where small advantages multiply into life-changing differences, driving behaviors that often work against the system’s intended outcomes.
While competition can drive innovation and self-improvement, its effects in large-scale systems often become counterproductive. Centralized frameworks amplify competition, creating pressures that push individuals to pursue external validation rather than personal growth. This tendency is not limited to education but extends into broader societal experiments where centralized policies often generate unintended consequences.
The roots of this phenomenon can be traced to China’s 科挙 (keju), the Imperial Examination system, which shaped not only educational competition but also the psychological, cultural, and political nature of governance in East Asia. Instituted during the Sui Dynasty and formalized during the Tang and Song Dynasties, the keju system created a framework in which individual success was tied to mastery of Confucian classics, leading to social mobility for a select few. However, it also instilled values of centralized control and hierarchical competition, which continue to influence societies today.
The Imperial Examination: The Blueprint for Mass Competition
The keju system was the world’s first large-scale standardized examination, designed to recruit government officials based on merit rather than birthright. By allowing individuals of lower social standing to rise through their intellectual abilities, the system was seen as a revolutionary equalizer in theory. However, in practice, it required years of intense preparation that only wealthier families could often afford, embedding systemic inequities despite its meritocratic aspirations.
The psychological toll of the keju system extended far beyond individual candidates. Success often required families to pool resources and prioritize one child’s education at the expense of others, creating a culture of collective sacrifice. Communities also became invested in producing keju scholars, viewing their success as a source of local pride. This collective focus on examination success led to a societal obsession with rote learning and conformity, sidelining creativity and critical thinking.
This legacy is evident in modern China’s gaokao, where millions of students compete for limited spots at prestigious universities. Much like the keju, the gaokao imposes a singular definition of success, amplifying pressure and fostering an environment where even slight advantages can have disproportionate outcomes. The parallels are striking: the gaokao perpetuates the same zero-sum mentality, emphasizing relative success over collective well-being. It also reinforces Confucian values of discipline and hierarchy, underscoring how historical systems shape contemporary societal frameworks.
Historical Parallels: The Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution
The pathology of centralized policy implementation is not confined to education—it permeates broader societal projects, as evidenced by the Great Leap Forward (1958–1962) and the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). Both campaigns were marked by sweeping policies applied to massive populations, where competition itself became the goal, often to devastating effect.
During the Great Leap Forward, Mao Zedong’s push to rapidly industrialize China and collectivize agriculture led to catastrophic consequences. Local cadres, under immense pressure to meet unrealistic production quotas, fabricated results to outcompete their peers. This competitive distortion led to disastrous policies such as backyard steel furnaces, where communities wasted resources producing unusable metal, and inflated grain reports, which contributed to famine. The focus on outcompeting others, rather than addressing the real needs of society, revealed how competition in centralized systems can spiral into self-destruction.
Similarly, the Cultural Revolution sought to remake Chinese society by promoting ideological purity and eliminating perceived enemies of the state. Students and workers were mobilized into factions competing to demonstrate their loyalty to Mao, leading to widespread social chaos. This destructive competition shifted focus from constructive goals, like improving governance or education, to personal survival and political opportunism. The result was a decade of cultural and intellectual devastation that derailed societal progress for years.
Both events highlight a common pathology: when centralized policies impose uniform objectives on large populations, competition for compliance or ideological dominance often overtakes the original purpose. In these cases, individuals and communities lose sight of broader societal goals, instead focusing on outperforming others at any cost.
Confucian Influence in Japan and Korea
The legacy of the Imperial Examination system extends beyond China, influencing neighboring countries like Japan and Korea, which also adopted Confucian principles as foundational to their educational and political systems. Though neither country implemented the keju system in its entirety, the emphasis on rigorous academic preparation and hierarchical competition remains deeply embedded in their cultures.
In Japan, the post-Meiji education system integrated Western models but retained a competitive structure akin to the keju. Entrance examinations for high schools and universities became gatekeepers for social mobility, mirroring the gaokao’s intensity. The concept of examination hell (受験地獄, juken jigoku) reflects the immense pressure placed on students, who see academic success as not just a personal achievement but a moral and social obligation. This focus on conformity and external validation continues into Japan’s corporate culture, where hierarchical structures and lifetime employment reinforce the same competitive ethos.
South Korea’s Suneung (College Scholastic Ability Test) represents an even more intense modern parallel. A single examination day determines access to top universities and, by extension, career and social status. Families invest heavily in private tutoring to give their children an edge, creating a shadow education economy reminiscent of the private academies that supported keju candidates. Confucian values of filial piety and societal harmony further exacerbate this pressure, as parents equate their children’s success with family honor. The result is a system where ambition becomes intertwined with suffering, perpetuating cycles of inequality and mental health challenges.
Centralized Control, Confucianism, and Political Systems
Ironically, the keju system’s emphasis on centralized control and hierarchy influenced not only education but also governance. While the Communist Party of China (CPC) publicly distances itself from Confucian ideology, its political structure retains many elements reminiscent of Confucian values. Meritocratic selection processes, disciplined hierarchy, and ideological education echo the principles that underpinned the keju system.
This continuity is evident in policies such as the one-child policy and the recent “Double Reduction” initiative aimed at easing educational pressure. Both policies reflect the same centralized approach to addressing societal challenges through sweeping top-down measures. However, as seen in the keju system, these policies often lead to unintended consequences. For instance, the ban on for-profit tutoring under “Double Reduction” merely shifted academic pressure to underground markets or disguised it as extracurricular activities like cultural or athletic training.
The recurring cycle of centralized implementation, unintended outcomes, and eventual policy adjustment reveals the limitations of managing large populations through uniform control. The keju system’s rigidity serves as a cautionary tale, illustrating how centralized frameworks can stifle flexibility and creativity, leading to long-term societal challenges that require continuous intervention.
Universal Patterns in Large-Scale Competition
While East Asia offers clear examples, the dynamics of large-scale competition and centralized control transcend cultural boundaries. The challenges arise not solely from Confucianism but from the inherent properties of large-scale human systems. As the number of participants increases, the statistical likelihood of extreme performance rises, creating ever-higher standards for “success.”
The psychological impact of mass competition is strikingly consistent across societies. Individuals competing within large groups often shift their focus from personal growth to external metrics, fostering a zero-sum mentality. This mindset prioritizes relative position over absolute achievement, impeding collective progress and exacerbating social inequality. The result is a system where individual aspirations are subsumed into a relentless pursuit of comparative success.
The economic implications of these patterns extend globally. As markets and educational systems become increasingly interconnected, competition now operates on an international scale. This global scaling mirrors the pressures observed in centralized national systems, reinforcing the need to address the universal challenges posed by mass competition.
From Aspiration to Empowerment
The interaction between centralized control, Confucian ideals, and mass competition has created a structure where aspirations often give way to unnecessary suffering. Rooted in the legacy of the keju system, this pyramid of pressure continues to shape not only educational systems but also the psychological and social fabric of East Asia. The Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution further demonstrate how centralized competition, untethered from meaningful goals, can spiral into harm on an even larger scale.
However, this does not have to remain the norm. Breaking free from the pressure pyramid requires a shift in both cultural and systemic values. Societies must embrace diverse paths to success, foster creativity, and prioritize well-being over zero-sum metrics. By learning from both the achievements and the failures of systems rooted in the keju and other centralized policies, we can transform ambition into empowerment. In doing so, we create systems that uplift individuals without crushing their spirit, ensuring that aspirations lead not to agony, but to fulfillment and meaningful progress.
Empowerment from aspiration involves transforming the energy of competition into a force that enables individuals to thrive on their own terms. Unlike the zero-sum outcomes of hierarchical systems, empowerment is rooted in diversity, allowing people to pursue unique paths and define success in ways that align with their personal values. It prioritizes intrinsic motivation over external validation, encouraging individuals to focus on their growth, creativity, and contributions to society. Empowerment also fosters resilience, as individuals are given the tools and freedom to adapt and flourish, even in challenging circumstances.
While agony from aspiration imposes conformity and amplifies stress, empowerment cultivates a sense of agency and purpose. It shifts the narrative from “winning at all costs” to “achieving meaningful goals,” redefining success as a process rather than a finite result. Empowerment acknowledges that aspirations should inspire growth and fulfillment, not exhaustion or despair. This requires systemic changes that emphasize collaboration over competition, nurture mental well-being, and provide equitable access to opportunities—ultimately creating a society where ambition uplifts rather than overwhelms.
Image: “The Official Career of Xu Xianqing” – on the imperial examination examinees sit their exam, 1590
Tom’s Blog 