Chapter 30

Chapter 30

Those who lead people by following the Tao
don’t use weapons to enforce their will.
Using force always leads to unseen troubles.

In the places where armies march,
thorns and briars bloom and grow.
After armies take to war,
bad years must always follow.
The skillful commander
strikes a decisive blow then stops.
When victory is won over the enemy through war
it is not a thing of great pride.
When the battle is over,
arrogance is the new enemy.
War can result when no other alternative is given,
so the one who overcomes an enemy should not dominate them.
The strong always weaken with time.

This is not the way of the Tao.
That which is not of the Tao will soon end.

================================================================

This chapter shows that Laozi is essentially a humanitarian sage. He is not a cold-blooded Machiavellian that likes to kill people.

Some people categorize Laozi’s philosophy as idealism whereas consider Confucius’ philosophy to be related to pragmatism/realism. I disagree. In fact, you cannot simplify Laozi’s philosophy as either idealism or realism. To me, Laozi’s philosophy is more comprehensive and realistic than Confucius’.  If Confucius steadfastly held on to virtue or righteousness, Laozi held flexible attitudes to both goodness/badness. Not that Laozi often espoused badness at the expense of goodness, but his view of the human psyche and the world was wider in scope and more complex and sophisticated than the simplistic dichotomy of Confucius’ tao.

Although Confucius tried to change the world by practicing and preaching virtue to the rulers of the times (he wanted to server under a king that would implement his philosophy), this did not work out. The harder he tried, the more he grew disappointed – because nobody could understand his grand vision of realizing a state that is in fullness of virtues. As a matter of fact, it occurs to me that Confucius failed to realize that he could not force people to practice virtues. Things have to come about naturally. Why would mess with things when they won’t bend to your will?

Laozi was realistic enough to withdraw to nature and develop serene attitudes to the then political turmoil. He did not seek for a king that would hire him and experiment politics with his tao philosophy. He likely knew that it was unrealistic to hope to find such a ruler. The peaceful state of affairs depicted in the tao te ching was perhaps what Laozi imagined of an ideal world that he could hope to see if the people of the whole world could voluntarily make concerted efforts to practice the tao.

Although Laozi is essentially a pacifist, he is not afraid to kill people in self-defense. He may be a “feminine” man but is adamant in killing people if that is the only available course of action to take. This is realism. Unlike a city state of ancient Greece that refused to take sides with either one of Athens and Sparta and met calamities by the winner of the two states (the purportedly neutral city state was destroyed and its citizens left their home as slaves), Laozi would encourage you to strengthen yourself militarily and use clever means through diplomacy (although this is my personal opinion. In fact, this type of Laozi is my new version of Laozi.).

Germany’s prime minister Bismarck was actually a well-balanced politician that had a long-term vision for his country, I think. He did not provoke war within the states of Deutschland out of lust for bloodshed. His only wish was to unify the states into one great Germany. When he achieved the union, he did not overstep his original plan by pursuing conquests of uncivilized countries to exploit them as colonies. He saw from the beginning to the end. Expansions in colonial power would only create more works and chaos. In his view, at an initial stage, sacrifices had to be made to achieve a great aim of one unified Germany. Again, this was not justification of his lust for bloodshed. He saw them as inevitable, and when Germany eventually became one, he stopped at the point where he planned to stop. (More details are illustrated in one of Greene’s books.)