Thread by @ThyConsigliori

John Minford, #SunTzu 1:15, "The way of war is a way of deception. When able, feign inability; when deploying the troops, appear not to be. When near, appear far; when far, appear near. Lure with bait; strike with chaos. ...

#SunTzu 1:15 continued, "If the enemy is full, be prepared. If strong, avoid him. If he is angry, disconcert him. If he is weak, stir him with pride. If he is relaxed, harry him; if his men are harmonious, split them. Attack where is unprepared; appear where you are unexpected."

There can be little question that this verse is the most important in all of #SunTzu. If you have John Minford's paperback edition, you see he uses the phrase "STRIKE WITH CHAOS" on the cover:

amazon.com/Art-War-Pengui…

A word about Minford's strategy of creating verses. There is a long history of translators determining how to present #SunTzu's thought in such packages. Minford does not, unlike others, number his verses, so the numbers here are added by me.

The method, the art with which Minford makes these choices, and the poetic power both with the words he's chosen and their placement on the page cries out, YOU MUST PURCHASE his book! You must read his verses for yourself, as he presents them. Please do so!

In addition to being the most important verse in #SunTzu, there is a long history of controversy over this verse, and nowhere more so than its most famous statement, "The way of war is a way of deception." The controversy seems so easy to clear up, to me.

When at war, the only ethical thing to do, is win. The greatest mandate of all, and it is a highly ethical, highly moral mandate, is that when fighting a war, win. This is not a friendship, and it will not allow you to simply be nice.

If you must kill your enemy to win, you must. But, wouldn't it be so much better if you could still win and NOT kill him? We will hear such guidance again and again. So, why not lie to him instead of killing him, where possible? I have to imagine anyone would rather be lied to.

But, you object, don't you lie to him IN ORDER to kill him, so that the choice is a false one? Well yes, if you have to. But no, not if you don't have to. That is, if you can win without killing him, then that's absolutely the goal. It's just not always feasible.

Here, however, is where this gets very simple. We can fight all day long about whether or not there should be wars and killing, at all. That is NOT something #SunTzu addresses. He simply states that war is necessary, important, and that a state's life or death is found in it.

If we just take him at his word, there is no moral issue over war, itself, as it simply exists, just as does air and animals, people and villages, stored treasure and those wanting to take it, etc. Why struggle morally over what cannot not be?

Granting this - and yes, you may disagree over the matter, but there is no question about where #SunTzu stands - then to tell the enemy the truth, empowering him to kill you and win the war, would be the ultimate in immorality.

Now, it must be confessed here again, there is simply NO morality issue for #SunTzu himself. It all comes down very simply to winning or losing. Winning = good. Losing = not good. That's all. But I suspect he'd appreciate our moral obsession. And here is how we can settle down.

Try, if you will, to accept that you're facing a very bad man, who will 100% use the truth against you, and if you can successfully lie, you will defeat him. The judgement is NOT over the lying. The judgement is over the quality of your enemy, of the fact that an enemy exists.

It is here, I find, that the debate rages. I am told there are no enemies, they're all friends. There are no good guys and bad guys, when I go fight a war, I am bad. Bad is fighting, so no more of that. There is no property to protect, either, just share, all done.

And that's why I am always running around asking everyone, "Have you read the Communist Manifesto recently?" The communist lie that only the state should own property leads immediately to the moral necessity to end war. And how do we do that?

Simple. We kill everyone who believes in property. Yes, to get to the stateless state, where war is no more, we'll have to fight many wars. But our wars are revolutionary and necessary, and their wars are counter-revolutionary and bad. If you don't believe me, read Mao Tse Tung.

Seriously. He was a fantastically good writer, brilliant thinker and a great leader. As with Alinsky, we must open our minds to the works of our enemies, and in his book, Chairman Mao lays out the logic I just reported above:

amazon.com/Art-War-Mao-Ts…

Twist and turn as we may, we soon discover that enemies have always existed, and the day that ceases will be the day we have entered some type of utopia. But in this world, there are enemies and to tell them the truth in combat is the most morally reprehensible act.

Within #SunTzu's winning counsel, there is stunning power for good, and it directly applies to our own everyday life. There are people who oppose you, and they are unworthy of the truth. When they use your words against you, you are serving them against yourself. Stop that.

The good is in defeating your opponent. The good is in winning. Don't lie to your friends, unless you have to, and then, be careful and limit it as much as possible. Don't tell the truth to your enemies, unless you have to, and then, be careful and limit it as much as possible.