Can there be such a thing as a Nazi Dao?

[Mark Saltveit]

I posted an essay today at Warp, Weft and Way, an excellent blog of Eastern philosophy discussing this question. It's a response to a provocative post Donald Sturgeon posted last October.

 

He was asking, can a Daoist (specifically a Zhuangist) criticize Nazis who are following their dao, given their rejection of conventional morality and relativism? [EDIT: to be clear, "their" rejection of conventional morality means "Daoists' rejection of"...]

 

My essay reframes the question to ask, "Can there even be such a thing as a Nazi Dao?" The short answer is, sort of, but the goals and techniques are so destructive of Dao that they would quickly backfire and fail. They can be rejected purely on the grounds of ineffectiveness. There really can't be a Dao that seeks complete domination of nations through constant war.

 

The question I didn't address is, are there other "bad" goals that can have effective Daos that work and would not undermine those involved? I can't think of any, but I'm curious what others think.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Mark Saltveit

[Cheshire Cat]

The Dao of rejecting conventional morality of Chuang-Tzu has a purpose based on the spiritual search of what is true inside men.

 

The Dao of nazis reject conventional morality for various reasons: race, politic, etc...

 

Hence, they're two different things, the latter being some sort of mental illness.

[Mark Saltveit]

I agree, DAO rain TAO. That's pretty much the conclusion I reached in the piece. But it's not only that they both reject conventional morality. Zhuangzi also challenges the notion of telling people that they're wrong, more or less, in chapter 2. So, we agree that Nazism is wrong, but are we saying that as Daoists, or just humans knowledgeable of history?

 

My point is that the Nazi way is deeply and fundamentally at odds with Dao. It's not wrong because of some morality; it just won't work, any more than fighting gravity, or fighting the ocean tides, would work. Not because the DDJ told me so, but empirically. Meddling governments fail, and poorly serve their people. They may win some battles but they will lose the war.

 

I see Daoism as spiritually pursuing not only what is true inside men, but what is true generally -- in natures, the cosmos, etc.

[shanlung]

If a Nazi thinks he is a Taoist, then you get your Nazi Taoist.

 

No one ever think that they are evil, even if what they are doing is evil and obnoxious to the rest of us.

They all felt they have a Greater Good to work to, and that the world misunderstood them.

 

Be that Lebenstraum, or Purity of their race, that what they were doing was fundamentally good.

 

I do not think those who blew themselves up in markets and in religious parades, those flew the planes into the Twin Towers, Pentagon and that lonely field felt that they were evil doing dastardly deeds. They felt they were on a holy missions.

They felt they were on a noble crusade and surely Paradise and the virgins there would welcome them.

 

You are free to think otherwise.

 

Idiotic Taoist

[chenping]

No one ever think that they are evil, even if what they are doing is evil and obnoxious to the rest of us.

They all felt they have a Greater Good to work to, and that the world misunderstood them.

 

I think this is an amazing impartial response. No one sees himself as an evil doer. It is always the other guy, at the receiving end who, seeing the evil, reacts to it, gives life to and foments more evil.

 

I know that Jesus taught a way to stop this chain reaction by turning the other cheek to end the "karma" of violence. What about the Tao Te Ching? Does it teach a way to deal with perceived injustice that we suffer at the hands of others?

[Jetsun]

If a Nazi thinks he is a Taoist, then you get your Nazi Taoist.

 

No one ever think that they are evil, even if what they are doing is evil and obnoxious to the rest of us.

They all felt they have a Greater Good to work to, and that the world misunderstood them.

 

They should have realised they were the bad guys when they looked in the mirror and saw skulls all over their black uniform to be fair.

[shanlung]

There were Nazis who were Catholics and Methodists and Protestants. I guess even Buddhists too.

 

People hijacked left and right whatever symbols to feel better.

And why should skulls be bad?

Because you think skulls are bad?

 

In Tibetan Buddhism, ritual drinking cups were, and are made from top of skulls.

Among other things, to signify the impermanence of life.

Ritual flutes were , and are , made from thigh bones of humans.

 

And for all I know, Satanism might be given a very bad rap from Christianity.

Good holy symbols were made devilish by Christianity as they seek to destroy all other beliefs so that only they remain, in the worse cultural genocide seen on Earth.

 

And not that long ago, Christianity chucked Taoist, Buddhists , Hindus with all Heathens and Pagans and said we all worship Satan and should be burned as we do not worship that man who got himself onto the cross.

 

 

 

Idiotic Taoist

[chenping]

These deities would be thought of as evil demons in some cultures based on their appearance and behavior, but their goal within their own tradition is still the enlightenment of sentient beings.

 

Evil is a fact. I don't deny this. Our response to evil that we do is visceral. We must not explain it away one way or another. Pointing out the evil doer is something else. It's an abdication of responsibility when we pin evil on someone else.

[Reed]

The question I didn't address is, are there other "bad" goals that can have effective Daos that work and would not undermine those involved? I can't think of any, but I'm curious what others think.

 

Bad from whose perspective? Presumably ZZ thought Cook Ding (or skilled butchers in general) had an effective Dao and a good goal, although from the perspective of all the oxen he slaughtered the goal was probably not so great

[Wells]

Nazi "Vril" = Chi = Prana = ...

The Thule society in Nazi Germany tried to develop technology to control and use that force.

[Birch]

Nazi "Vril" = Chi = Prana = ...

The Thule society in Nazi Germany tried to develop technology to control and use that force.

 

Yes, apparently there was a trip to Tibet to learn stuff.

[9th]

"Questions have often been asked at these lectures as to what is 'black magic' and I have replied that there is neither red, green, nor yellow magic. There is mechanics, that is, what 'happens,' and there is 'doing.' 'Doing' is magic and 'doing' can be only of one kind. There cannot be two kinds of 'doing.' But there can be a falsification, an imitation of the outward appearance of 'doing,' which cannot give any objective results but which can deceive naive people and produce in them faith, infatuation, enthusiasm, and even fanaticism.


"This is why in true work, that is, in true 'doing,' the producing of infatuation in people is not allowed. What you call black magic is based on infatuation and on playing upon human weaknesses. Black magic does not in any way mean magic of evil. I have already said earlier that no one ever does anything for the sake of evil, in the interests of evil. Everyone always does everything in the interests of good as he understands it. In the same way it is quite wrong to assert that black magic must necessarily be egoistical, that in black magic a man strives after some results for himself. This is quite wrong. Black magic may be quite altruistic, may strive after the good of humanity or after the salvation of humanity from real or imaginary evils. But what can be called black magic has always one definite characteristic. This characteristic is the tendency to use people for some, even the best of aims, without their knowledge and understanding, either by producing in them faith and infatuation or by acting upon them through fear.


"That is why I say that there are many things worse than 'black magic.' Such are various 'occult' and theosophical societies and groups. Not only have their teachers never been at a school but they have never even met anyone who has been near a school. Their work simply consists in aping. But imitation work of this kind gives a great deal of self-satisfaction. One man feels himself to be a 'teacher,' others feel that they are 'pupils,' and everyone is satisfied. No realization of one's nothingness can be got here and if people affirm that they have it, it is all illusion and self-deception, if not plain deceit. On the contrary, instead of realizing their own nothingness the members of such circles acquire a realization of their own importance and a growth of false personality.

 

 

- Tiger of Turkestan, 1921

[9th]

[Birch]

"This characteristic is the tendency to use people for some, even the best of aims, without their knowledge and understanding, either by producing in them faith and infatuation or by acting upon them through fear."

 

Which would be characteristic of many fields today. I'm noting this one.

 

Thanks for posting the quote.

[chenping]

Bad from whose perspective? Presumably ZZ thought Cook Ding (or skilled butchers in general) had an effective Dao and a good goal, although from the perspective of all the oxen he slaughtered the goal was probably not so great

 

I suppose we would have to consider this impersonally from no perspective. Mark was talking about "effective Dao" which implies a perfect way of doing anything.

 

But doing always involves a doer, a person driven by a perspective.

[chenping]

"This characteristic is the tendency to use people for some, even the best of aims, without their knowledge and understanding, either by producing in them faith and infatuation or by acting upon them through fear."

 

Which would be characteristic of many fields today. I'm noting this one.

 

Thanks for posting the quote.

 

This is characteristic of political theatre especially in America where billions of dollars are spent just to win the presidential election. The only way to destroy black magic is to remove the black magician's bag of tricks, namely, democracy.

Edited February 25, 2013 by chenping

[Birch]

"namely, democracy. "

 

The working version or the non-working version of that?

[shanlung]

Nazi "Vril" = Chi = Prana = ...

The Thule society in Nazi Germany tried to develop technology to control and use that force.

 

Come to think of it, there was at least a Nazi Jew.

Except they had to be very discrete about it, especially Adolf himself.

[chenping]

"namely, democracy. " The working version or the non-working version of that?

 

Of what? The bag of tricks called democracy? It always works especially when it doesn't. Black magic is brilliant.

[Owledge]

My point is that the Nazi way is deeply and fundamentally at odds with Dao. It's not wrong because of some morality; it just won't work, any more than fighting gravity, or fighting the ocean tides, would work. Not because the DDJ told me so, but empirically. Meddling governments fail, and poorly serve their people. They may win some battles but they will lose the war.

Are we talking about the way of Nazi Germany in this thread, or about national socialism, or about tyranny/dictatorship/fascism?

[Mark Saltveit]

Are we talking about the way of Nazi Germany in this thread, or about national socialism, or about tyranny/dictatorship/fascism?

 

Well, the original question was, is there anything so wrong (or unDaoish) that it does not have its own Dao? Nazism was only one example, and the writer of the original essay wasn't really specific to the history of Nazi Germany. Since that history is one of the few things I have actually studied academically, I did look at the specifics of that movement.

 

But you can apply the same thought to any government. If Daoism (Lao-Zhuang thought, to be specific) says to run a government like you cook a small fish -- ie with a very light touch -- can there be a Dao of running a totalitarian government? Or is that a contradiction in terms, like blowing something up gracefully,?

Edited February 25, 2013 by Mark Saltveit

[Owledge]

As far as I understand, what Lao Tzu pointed at as being "Dao" is balance. He advocates finding a balance between action and non-action. It doesn't seem to be the extreme of total non-action, because that is not grounded in material existence and might just lead to transcendence.

Personally I'm still kinda sceptic about the whole idea, because what is described in the DDJ doesn not sound like the origin of everything and that everything is part of the Dao and thus alright.

But hey, the DDJ is highly phisosophical, no easy answers. I have a problem with the whole idea of "The Dao of ...". But trying to assume a meaning in that, I think there no such thing as "the Dao of tyranny" exists, because tyranny is a word for a phenomenon that by definition does not follow the Dao as described by Lao Tzu. Tyranny is already an extreme on a scale from chaos to control and other types of scales.

 

As a sidenote, I also noticed that "De" is mostly forgotten. "De" is in a way the path, so why do people say "the Dao of ..." and not "the De of ...". What do people actually mean with former phrase? Do they mean doing anything in harmony with how nature works?

[Mark Saltveit]

I have a problem with the whole idea of "The Dao of ...".

I'm fine with it -- it seems to come straight out of the stories in Zhuangzi and the Daodejing about Butcher Ding, the fighting rooster trainer, the wheelright, the archer, etc.

 

But your point about the impossibility of "the Dao of tyranny" is exactly on target. That's a good way to put it. I see the Daoist perspective as being, "Well, there are more effective and less effective ways to do tyranny, but tyranny itself is not effective in the long run." So it's kind of like asking, "how can I screw up gracefully?"

 

[chenping]

But your point about the impossibility of "the Dao of tyranny" is exactly on target. That's a good way to put it. I see the Daoist perspective as being, "Well, there are more effective and less effective ways to do tyranny, but tyranny itself is not effective in the long run." So it's kind of like asking, "how can I screw up gracefully?"

 

What is tyranny? It all comes back to popular opinion. Is it possible to pin it down? If not, then being on the right side of a conflict is all that matters. If Hitler had won, this whole world would be run like Singapore, the political model chosen by China.

[Owledge]

If Hitler had won, this whole world would be run like Singapore, the political model chosen by China.

Ah!... The amusing discipline of long-term political prognoses combined with the nasty "what-if".

Edited February 26, 2013 by Owledge