Mencius roots the possibility of justified rebellion in a profoundly moral vision of political authority. For him, a ruler is truly a “king” only when he governs with benevolence and righteousness, caring for the welfare of the people and aligning his conduct with the Way. Legitimacy is not a permanent possession but a living relationship between Heaven, the ruler, and the people, expressed through what is called the Mandate of Heaven. When a ruler abandons benevolent governance and becomes tyrannical, he effectively severs this relationship and forfeits that mandate. Such a figure is no longer regarded as a true ruler at all, but as a mere “fellow” or criminal who has lost any moral claim to obedience.

From this perspective, rebellion is not celebrated as a raw assertion of power, but understood as a grave response to a prior moral collapse. The people’s welfare stands as the ultimate standard: when the ruler harms rather than protects the people, the basic purpose of government is overturned. In such circumstances, removing a tyrant is seen as restoring the proper moral order, not as an attack on legitimate authority. Historical examples, such as the overthrow of infamous tyrants, are interpreted as righteous actions against those who had already nullified their own status as rulers through their conduct. In this way, what might appear outwardly as rebellion is reframed as the execution of justice upon someone who has already stepped outside the bounds of rightful kingship.

Mencius also emphasizes that the will of Heaven is reflected in the hearts and responses of the people. When the populace turns away from a ruler and supports a virtuous alternative, this shift is taken as a sign that Heaven’s Mandate has moved on. Yet this does not license rebellion based on mere dissatisfaction or private gain. Any legitimate resistance must be grounded in genuine concern for the people’s suffering and led by those of superior moral character, whose aim is to restore benevolent rule rather than simply replace one form of oppression with another. In this vision, resisting tyranny becomes not only a right but a moral responsibility, undertaken with sobriety and guided by the higher demands of righteousness and compassion.