VOLUME III, SEMESTER 3, CHAPTER 34, SECTION 1
Two flattenings, one is called heaven, one is called nightmare
The back half of the term begins. We call out that other half, the thing that cannot be reckoned into the account, yet lets a man live like a man. It has a name that was argued over for a hundred years, laughed at for a hundred years, it is called communism. But we cannot look at it straight from the first, because it was long ago painted into two extreme pictures, one a heaven, one a nightmare. This section first brings these two pictures down, and wipes them clean, before we can see its own face.
One, the first flattening: painting it into a heaven
The first flattening is to paint communism into a heaven on earth.
In this picture, it is a world with no more poor, no more grabbing, every man taking what he needs, wanting a thing and having it. Man need not fret over food and clothing, need not bow his head for money, all are near as one family, at peace, good as a fair dream that never again wakes. This picture, over a hundred and more years, roused men without number, and how many gave up house and home for it, gave up even their lives. It is painted too fair, fair to where a man will give all for it.
But painted too fair is in itself a signal. A thing, painted with not one flaw, not one cost, good past the true, that is mostly not true. The greatest fault of this heaven picture is that it forgot the man. It sets it down that every man is unselfish, that all are willing to spend their whole force for the crowd, that none idles, none takes over much. But the front half of the term said it again and again, man has his private heart, his private wants, and this is a rule at the level of life. A picture that wipes out man’s private heart whole, painted however fair, is hung in the air. It is not communism’s own face, it is a crowd of kindly men, painting their own fairest wish onto it.
Two, the second flattening: painting it into a nightmare
The second flattening is exactly the reverse of the first, to paint communism into a nightmare.
In this picture, it is queues that never end, shelves swept bare, every man eating from the big shared pot and every man idling, doing much and doing little all one, and at the last none willing to do, the whole society sunk together to the lowest. In this picture there is a blacker thing still: you are not allowed your own things, not allowed to lift your head, man held down hard. This picture too, over a hundred and more years, scared off men without number, made many, at one hearing of the word, knit the brow, shake the head, and be unwilling to hear more.
This nightmare picture too did not come from the void. Those queues it paints, those bare shelves, that big shared pot, in history truly came out, not one bit false, and later we go on purpose to look. But the fault of this picture is: it takes the look of a certain few places, a certain stretch of time, where the word was used badly, used to ruin, and holds that up as the word’s own, only, face. It takes one botched practice for the nature of the thing. It is as if a man wounded another with a kitchen knife, and you said the kitchen knife is by birth a weapon of killing, and should be thrown away. But the kitchen knife was made for cutting vegetables. What used it badly was that pair of hands, not the knife itself.
Three, the two pictures are in truth one same error
Set the two pictures side by side, and you find a telling thing: one painted a heaven, one painted a nightmare, they look set against each other to the death, yet they commit one same error.
One same what error. Both pull this thing up by the root from man’s everyday, and puff it into, or run it down into, a whole great institution, a great society, a kind of state that would hold every man, a thing to overspread all. The heaven side says this great institution can bring bliss. The nightmare side says this great institution can bring only bitterness. But what they argue over is one same thing: a thing puffed up huge, a thing to swallow the whole society in one mouthful. They both take for granted one premise: communism is a great state, a great institution, that would cover all, one or the other.
This shared premise is exactly the thing this chapter means to take apart. What this book means to say is: communism was never a great state, a great institution, that would cover all. The heaven side thought that wrong premise, at its best, to the very extreme. The nightmare side thought that wrong premise, at its worst, to the very extreme. Argue however fiercely, they still stand on one same wrong ground. Take the ground apart, and these two pictures fall together.
Four, great argument seems slow of tongue
On these two pictures painted to the extreme, call a line of Laozi, to set up for us that clearness we ought to have. Laozi says: great argument seems slow of tongue. So runs the line in the Daodejing.
Put it plain. Argument is the gift of the tongue, the eloquent. Slow of tongue is clumsy of mouth, not smooth in speaking. Great argument seems slow of tongue is to say: the truly most reasoned, most tested clearness looks instead like the clumsy, the one that will not argue, the one that is in no hurry to lay down a verdict. Take this line and hold it up to the two pictures.
Those two pictures, one speaks the thing to the extreme of fair, one to the extreme of black, both speak with a nailed down certainty, a stirring fervor, both are the look of great argument. But Laozi says, the truly clear is great argument that seems slow of tongue, is in no hurry to speak the thing full, to speak it to the end. The truth of this thing communism is exactly the slow of tongue, the plain, the not so earth shaking: it is not a heaven, and not a nightmare, it is only a thing of the human world very ordinary, very daily, there all along. Whatever is spoken both extremely fair and extremely absolute, black or white, keep a watch on it. The truth is often not on those two ends that cry the loudest, the truth is often that thing that neither cries nor clamors, plain and simple, right in your days.
Five, what this section set, crossing to the next
Good. This section brought the two extreme pictures down and wiped them clean.
One painted communism into a heaven, forgetting man’s private heart, kindly men painting their fairest wish onto it. One painted it into a nightmare, taking the look of some place, some time, where it was used badly, for its own, only, face. These two pictures look set against each other to the death, yet they commit one same error: both take it for a great state, a great institution to cover all, one or the other, one thinking it to the extreme of good, one to the extreme of bad, standing on one same wrong ground. Through Laozi’s line, great argument seems slow of tongue, we set up a clearness: whatever is spoken both extremely fair and extremely absolute, the truth is mostly not there.
The position this section set is: heaven and nightmare are the two faces of one same error, both mistaking communism for a great institution that would swallow the whole society.
So, once these two pictures are wiped away, what in the end is its own face. If it is not a great state, a great institution, then what is it. The next section restores it to one most plain line of everyday speech, and you will find it is right beside you, you use it every day, only you never knew it when you saw it.
Credit to the ancestors; the mistakes are mine: Tiger Lyon.
Section 2, Restored to one line of plain speech, distribution by need