Reflections On Trumpian Morality
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Trumpian morality takes us back to Thomas Hobbes, who said that life “in the state of nature” was a war of all against all, and that human life in that state was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. The reason mankind has emerged from savagery is that this war of all against all is won by the strongest who have followers and create what we call the State, which consists essentially in a monopoly of coercive power. These rulers make the rules for everybody, and anyone who challenges these rules is killed. These rules create what humans call civilization. As exercised by parents over their children, it creates civilized human beings who would not dare to question or violate these rules. In other words, this coercive force creates human morality, sometimes called a “conscience” that internalizes those rules. Religions say that such morality “comes from God”, but Hobbes would say that religion is only a way of internalizing those coercive rules, and it creates a supernatural being called “God” which is an authority figure inculcated in children at a very young age to assist in the process of socialization. This, by the way, is exactly what Freud would also say. I find it rather convincing myself.
Nevertheless, I think there is some kind of difficulty with this solution. It says that morality in its origin comes from the coercive power of a ruling class. The problem is whether such morality applies to the ruling class itself? I’m sorry to say that history shows by innumerable examples that the answer is no, obviously not, and this applies in spades to “Caligula” Trump. If we are going to have peace in this world, we need to have a moral ruling class, which is a problem Plato tried to solve in the “Republic”. His answer was, not “God”, but that there is an objective essence called “the Good”, which is the same for all human beings and can be known by the human mind. This, not coercive force, is what creates peace and order in human society. The true good ruler acts in the best interests of his people. Morality is not relative, it is something that is universally human. This is encapsulated in the idea of a “philosopher king”. I find this epistemological theory rather persuasive. However, what Plato never does in the “Republic” or anywhere else I have read is to explain how such a benevolent philosopher ever becomes king when the ruling class will use coercive force to prevent it. Plato’s answer is certainly not “democracy”. The demos, or will of the people is not based on knowledge, and is easily deceived by the agents and “kingmakers” of the ruling class. He describes the process whereby democracy, which he sees as the second lowest form of human government, devolves into what he calls “tyranny”, ruled by a monstrous psychopath.
I personally agree with Freud that human beings have evolved as animals with certain basic instincts including both the libidinal and the predatory, and also in calling the libidinal element “love”, which he describes as a basic process in human nature and perhaps even cosmic nature as a creative life force that organizes the universe, in opposition to entropy, the basic death process, which is the progressive destruction of all organization. Empedocles’ name for these processes was “love” and “strife”. Zoroastrian religion called the creative “Ahura Mazda” or “Ormazd”, and the destructive one is called “Ahriman”, that brings predators, including warlike tribes, diseases and crop-destroying pests. Like the apocalyptical Abrahamic religions that call them “God” and “Satan”, it also believes in a final conflict where Ahriman is defeated forever and the universe is made eternally perfect. My theory does not include an endpoint. It says that from the cosmic standpoint, there is no end to change. Change is life and death. Change is the most fundamental principle of all. It contains both life and death. Without death, without Ahriman, there would be no life and no change. I prefer to use the Taoist designation and call it “The Way” or “Tao”, something that is timeless, something that can be understood but not described. To understand and follow it is virtue, both individual and social. It is also true human science “Tao Te Ching” means the book of the virtue of Way. It is a truth that causes evolution in human society. I also call this scientific socialism. This is my theology. I hope you like it. If you do, you can have it for free. No credit necessary. If not, don’t, use some other one or come up with your own.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
