More Sun Tzu: The Healing Arts

-------------------------
I really liked the little book quoted from the previous post, so here's a bit more with a little different twist;

From the Translator's Introduction, the following:

"According to an old story, a lord of ancient China once asked his physician, a member of a family of healers, which of them was the most skilled in the art.

The physician, whose reputation was such that his name became synonymous with medical science in China, replied,
"My eldest brother sees the the spirit of sickness and removes it before it takes shape, so his name does not get out of the house.

My elder brother cures illness when it is still extremely minute, so his name does not get out of the neighborhood.

As for me, I puncture veins, prescribe potions, and massage skin, so from time to time my name gets out and is heard among the lords."

Among the tales of ancient China, none captures more beautifully than this the essence of the Art of War, the premier classic of the science of strategy in conflict.

The healing arts and the martial arts may be a world apart in ordinary usage, but they are parallel in several senses; in recognizing, as the story says, that the less needed the better; in the sense that both involve strategy in dealing with disharmony; and in the sense that in both knowledge of the problem is key to the solution.
----------------

In both healing arts and martial arts Sun Tzu's philosophy the peak efficiency of knowledge and strategy is to make conflict altogether unnecessary.
And like the story of the healers, there are are all grades of martial arts;:

The superior militarist foils enemies' plots;
next best is to ruin their alliances;
next after that is to attack their armed forces;
worst is to besiege cities.

The ideal strategy whereby one could win without fighting, accomplish the most by doing the least, bears the characteristic stamp of Taoism, the ancient tradition of knowledge that fostered both the healing arts and the martial arts in China.
The ancient Taoist masters showed how the man of aggressive violence appears to be ruthless but is really an emotionalist; then they slay the emotionalist with real ruthlessness before revealing the spontaneous nature of free humanity.

Real ruthlessness, the coldness of complete objectivity, always includes oneself in its cutting assessment of the real situation.

Real ruthlessness can be perceived as inhumane, but this is not used by the original philosophers as a justification for quasi-ruthless possessive aggression, but instead as a meditation on the ultimate meaninglessness of the greed and possessiveness that underlie aggression.

In India, Buddhist aspirants used to visit burning grounds and watch the corpses of those whose families couldn't afford a cremation rot away.
They did this to terrify the greed and possessiveness out of themselves.
After that they turned their minds toward thoughts of ideal individuals and ideal societies.

Similarly, Master Sun has his readers dwell on the ravages of war, from its incipient phases of treachery and alienation to its extreme forms of incendiary attack and siege, viewed as a sort of mass cannibalism of human and natural resources.
With this device he gives the reader an enhanced feeling for the significance of individual and social virtues espoused by humanitarian pacifists.

Paradox is often thought of as a standard device of Taoist psychology, used to cross imperceptible barriers of awareness.
Perhaps the paradox of the Art of War is in its opposition to war.
And, as The Art of War wars against war, it does so by its own principles;
it infiltrates the enemy's lines, uncovers the enemy's secrets, and changes the hearts of the enemy's troops.
----------------

Writings like this ancient one renew my hope that there is a better, more peaceful and more sustainable future for those living on this planet, despite the many formidable challenges.

In particular, the concept of individual actions that can be magnified and become part of our personal, local, regional, national and international dialogue.
Such changes as we need are within our ability to achieve, but not without the clear thinking, right actions and hard work that actually make steady and meaningful progress.

Perhaps, the time is upon us for for this transformation to grow in earnest, with all the financial, social and environmental problems that have become evident to all but the willfully blind.
We are literally witnessing our own version of burning grounds now, if we care to look at the world's situation that way!

I hope that being faced with such severe challenges will now spur us to correct their causes, and soon.
I will try to do what I can to make the individual changes that I can, and that are so clearly calling out to be made.
I hope you will consider this as a clear opportunity to do so too.

May God bless us all in this endeavor.
----------------------

On Warriors & War

From a translator's preface of Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War', published by Shambala in 1991, comes the following:

The Art of War, compiled well over 2000 years ago by a mysterious Chinese warrior-philosopher, is still perhaps the most prestiguous and influential book of strategy in the world today, as eagerly studied in Asia by modern politicians and executives as it has been by military leaders and strategists for the last two millenia and more.

In Japan, which was transformed directly from a feudal culture into a corporate culture virtually overnight, contemprary students of the Art of War have applied the strategy of this ancient classic to modern politics and business with similar alacrity. Indeed, some see in the successes of postwar Japan an illustration of Sun Tzu's dictum of the classic, "To win without fighting is best."

As a study of the anatomy of organizations in conflict, The Art of War applies to competition and conflict in general, on every level from the interpersonal to the international. Its aim is invincibility, victory without battle, and unassailable strength through understanding of the physics, politics, and psychology of conflict.

This translation of the Art of War presents the classic from the point of view of its background in the great spirual tradition of Taoism. What is most characteristically Taoist about the Art of War in such a way as to recommend itself to the modern day is the manner in which power is continually tempered by a profound undercurrent of humanism. The Art of War is thus a book not only of war but also of peace, above all a tool for understanding the very roots of conflict and resolution.

-----------------

Why would one imagine the lessons of Sun Tzu apply only to an actual war?
It seems to me that he believed, as I do, that actually fighting war was an indication of the failure of every other option.
Of course, Sun Tzu was always prepared for that eventuality and ready to fight fiercely and bravely if it came to that.
But, to him the ultimate success was to achieve a 'victory' by avoiding the fighting!
One certainly has to have a better grasp as to what constitutes a 'victory' than our current leaders, including President Bush and Senator John McCain.

I have the highest respect for Senator McCain, but he is not acting like the legitimate hero he is.
Maybe that's because he is trying so hard to match or surpass the careers of his father, grandfather and earlier ancestors, all of which had very distinguished military service.
And with my own Scottish heritage and limited Navy service, I do have many common beliefs and values that I share with John McCain.
But, I feel he is going about playing the hero, fear and anger cards too strongly, and at the expense of seeing the broader scope of conflict that Sun Tzu saw.
One does not have to fight in a war to be an effective warrior.
In fact, there may be a real danger in having a President whose first instinct is to fight!
--------------

The English language expression 'silver spoon' is an expression for wealth; someone born into a wealthy family is said to have "been born with a silver spoon in his mouth".
I think John McCain was born a 'brass spoon' because of his family's Navy and long military heritage.
That can be a blessing and a curse, as McCain himself seems to imply in his book 'Faith of my Fathers'.

McCain's military heritage is even broader than his father's and grandfather's Naval careers.
He also claims ancestral links to royalty; the famous fighting Scot, Robert the Bruce; a General in Washington's Continental Army and another grandfather, William Alexander McCain (b. North Carolina, 1812 – d. 1863), who died in the Civil War while serving as a private in Company I, 5th Regiment, Mississippi Cavalry, Confederate States Army.
During his life, this grandfather owned a 2,000-acre plantation in Carroll County, Mississippi known as "Teoc", as well as 52 slaves.

With that kind of background, who could doubt John McCain's patriotism and bravery?
Warriors of his dedication and skill are important to the future security of our Country, as are the US troops now serving in our military.
But, Amercia was established for peaceful purposes, to be governed by citizens and civilians, not professional military leaders.
It is important that our military be kept strong and ready, but also in check to be used only as necessary, and then as a last resort.
That is what Sun Tzu learned and has passed along to us through his teachings.
I think it would behoove us to pay attention to those ancient words of wisdom, be guided by them and adopt them as our National policy.
----------------

In the Valley of Elah

At a friend's suggestion, we watched a Netflix DVD movie titled 'In the Valley of Elah', starring Tommy Lee Jones, who received an Oscar nomination for his role.
This was an excellent film about a very serious subject; the terrible impacts that are happening to our brave combat soldiers who have seen action in Iraq.

An exemplary soldier from a military family goes missing after returning from Iraq and his concerned parents get help from a police detective to investigate.
This is probably not something that young and impressionable Mary Poppins & Walt Disney fans might enjoy, but it is a powerful story -based on actual events- that needed to be told.

Many people may think they know about the horrors of war from their own service, stories from others, or just watching TV, video games & movies about it.
But, maybe not about the unnecessary horrors of an ill-conceived war, like Iraq, where our troops have been deliberately put in harms way from unseen enemies who operate on their own turf and use tactics that the Geneva convention never addressed.
Those conditions have such lethal and lasting effects on human beings, that we cannot even conceive of this 'war's' eventual costs!

Whether they believe that anything comes after life or not, the architects of this contrived conflict -I won't honor it by giving the title of war- may have created such a bad karma for themselves that they may burn in the hottest of hells for eternity!

A real war, resisting ruthless aggression by power hungry psychopaths -like Hitler- is rightly justified. But, even that is still a terrible thing that is to be avoided if possible by diplomacy, worldwide peace-keeping alliances and any other means available, providing of course one believes war is an outdated way of resolving anything, and an absolute last resort to be used only if all else fails.

Why do we elect, tolerate and not even question leaders who routinely act against this principle and against the lessons we ought to have learned long ago?
When will we learn that democracy is not a spectator sport for lazy people who prefer being pampered consumers instead of alert and hard working citizens?
I think that starts here at home, in our towns and districts that are the true wellsprings of freedom.
But these wellsprings also need to be nurtured, replenished and renewed by us to be sustained, so that what we get is bubble-up democracy and not some corrupted idea of trickle-down anything!

What we see with the Iraq situation is something that could have been avoided had we paid better attention!
We certainly could have paid better attention to the people we elected, and that starts at home.
So, go ahead and make my day and connect the dots.
You get what you pay for, so be careful how you spend your money, time and vote!

Between Iraq & A Hard Place

Last Monday night at the Council meeting, a gentleman spoke during the Public Comment time about the essential rightness of communities and citizens expressing their objections to the Iraq 'War'. Who can honestly disagree with that? Granted, we are here now and can't take back history, but we can certainly object!

Since the invasion on March 20, 2003 -and the 'Mission Accomplished' speech on May 1, 2003- there have been over 650,000 Iraqi deaths and almost 3700 Americans killed. The $400 BILLION that has been appropriated for this 'war of choice' amounts to a cost of over $1300 for every man, woman and child in the US. With the population of Whatcom County at about 185,000, that is the equivalent of about $240 MILLION. The gentleman has other statistics he will present later that indicate the war's cost to Whatcom County is only $130 MILLION. Either number is a heckuva cost! And that's just the dollars. What about the human costs, the suffering that lingers, the worry about more losses, the concern about destabilizing the world, the toll on our allies, and the erosion of trust and respect that the US has earned over many decades? Difficult to gain, but easy to lose. But we have lost it, because we believed a series of deliberate lies from our highest elected official!

I strongly agree with Bill Bradley -whose book I am paraphrasing liberally- that the central lie was not about Weapons of Mass Destruction, or about liberation of the Iraqi people from a dispicable tyrant, or that Iraqi oil would pay for the costs, or that Iraq would house permanent US bases against terror, or that a free Iraq could help support Israel. The central lie was that Iraq was linked to al Qaeda! It wasn't, but it certainly is now! Yet, as late as the summer of 2006, 64% of Americans still believed that central lie! How is that for abuse of truth -and power? At last in 2007, over 60% of Americans finally thought the invasion was a bad idea! What took so long for that to happen? Isn't our history completely different from what has transpired since March 20, 2003?

The events of 9/11 changed things forever, because it was the first time we were attacked on our own turf since Pearl Harbor. Our initial response to retaliate at al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan was appropriate, since they were the perpetrators. Stepped up intelligence operations, police actions, targeted military strikes and diplomacy and real coalition building with other nations are the recognized and appropriate methods that take time, but work. A full scale invasion of a foreign country -that had no al Qaeda or Taliban- was not justified, and has not worked. It's just that simple! Not only has it not worked, it has backfired and exacerbated Mid-East unrest in a way that Osama bin Laden could only have imagined!

War on terrorism is serious business, but force should only be used as a last resort, and that must be done with an exit strategy and massive enough force to insure victory in a reasonable time. None of that happened. Now, we're stuck in a mess of our own making, and its just getting worse every day we are there. So now we deal with that mess too.

What Ben Franklin said is still true, 'an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure'. Let's don't let that pound grow to several pounds!

Just before the invasion of Iraq happened, the Herald published the Guest Editorial below, which I believe reflected the thoughts and hopes of many Americans. Unfortunately, our President was not one of them.
----------------------------------------------
War Principles: A Herald Guest Editorial

From the City Council meetings held during the week of January 27th, at which a possible Iraq War Resolution was publicly discussed, the most commonly heard objections seemed to fall into one of these four groupings:

• Decision-making Roles & Responsibility:
This is not the City Council’s job or even within its realm of responsibility. Federal officials were elected who are responsible for such decisions, we need to trust them to do it. Even if we agreed on a Resolution, it wouldn’t make any difference.

• Accuracy in Representing Community Sentiment:
The City Council can’t speak for everyone in our community. Only a small group of vocal activists are behind this idea. It's impossible to make such a decision without hearing from everyone. This exercise is doomed to be a waste of time and taxpayer money.

• Conflict Resolution on a Controversial Issue:
This is too divisive an issue on which to have any meaningful discussion. We could never agree anyway. I’m having trouble focusing both halves of my brain on this issue.

• Overcoming Mind-sets:
City Council needs to avoid all unnecessary controversies, such as this issue, especially during an election year. Such an action is unpatriotic, doesn’t support our military, or may even border on treason. My mind is already made up and I won’t change it - no Resolution -pro or con!

It may sound strange, but I was encouraged by the turnout and the comments made at the Town Meeting, which attracted a diversity of thought and opinion, comparable to that heard during earlier meetings or received through phone calls and e-mail.

My hope is that we can make this issue much less divisive. How this might happen would be to align our aspirations with what is possible, and simply begin to identify those points upon which general agreement can be reached within our community. If some points of agreement can be reached, these could evolve into a 'de facto' set of principles, or nucleus of ideas that the Community could endorse. But, to reach such a goal will require us to raise our sights well above the win-lose situation that we now seem to face.

An idea gelled the morning that Brett & Debbie on KGMI said that 'no one wants a war'. That is so obviously true that it could become our first point of community agreement! What reasonable person could disagree with that?

That spurred more thinking about other principles that might have similar potential for community agreement, such as:

Before declaring war:
• War should be a last resort; a sign of a failed international policy and diplomacy.
• US unilateral action should be discouraged; UN support encouraged.
• The US Constitution should be strictly followed for US involvement.
• A formal declaration of war by US Congress should be expressly required before any attacks -except defensive- are authorized.
• US War budget estimates should use full-cost accounting methods to anticipate paying for mitigating domestic economy impacts as well as global impacts resulting from war.

In the event war is duly declared:
• International law must be respected, including the Geneva Convention.
• Civilian populations should not be deliberately targeted or endangered.

Following the successful conclusion of war:
• The US needs to fully recognize and be accountable for the full negative impacts on both its own people and the people who are harmed or deemed the enemy.
• The US should commit the resources and expertise necessary to help reconstruct the essential public infrastructure destroyed or damaged by war actions.
• The US should commit to a meaningful and ongoing humanitarian policy of assistance to the people harmed, whether deemed friendly or enemy.
• The US should recognize there are finite limits to both its resources and power in the world and diligently seek ways to use them wisely in the best interests of world humanity and the global environment.

A methodology to determine the extent of agreement on these -or other- points could be to simply test each one against the list of objections above. If widespread agreement can be reached on one or more points, these could be clearly considered reflective of the will of our community.