Yes! There are all kinds of people in this society. Someone has come up with any trick in order to be different. Such a doctrine and such a school, even if it is nonsense, has a certain following. Even if it is to persuade others to do bad things, arouse other people's anger, and make people reckless of the consequences, they will have a certain following.

This idea of Confucius will definitely have followers. Let alone! This kind of thinking of his has a certain motivational ....... Let some simple-minded people think that this is a viable way to save the world. Even! Think it's the only way to save the world.

Oh, yes! Starting from myself, I took the lead, I promised that I would not make mistakes, not to infringe on others, if everyone in this world is like this, wouldn't this society be better?

But what most people don't think about is that this beautiful and only "salvation" is not actual, but based on a hypothesis. It is assumed that others are the same as themselves, do not be a person who violates the etiquette of the week, abide by the etiquette system, and behave with etiquette.

After all! Here's what if!

What if no one else wants to do that?

So! In the end, you're left alone to live like this. And also! Those few followers of yours, they are also living like this stupidly.

This kind of thinking of yours not only hurts yourself and harms yourself, but also pits others and those followers who believe in you.

Taoism also pays attention to self-cultivation and morality, does not infringe on others, does not do illegal things, unites with the people around them, and integrates into life. But! Taoism will never use etiquette to bind others, and use rules and regulations to bind others.

Freely! It's the instinct of human nature.

When others affect the life of the Taoists, they can avoid it, and if they can't avoid it, they will fight. Even if the other party is the Son of Heaven and the King, Lao Tzu will wipe you out and destroy all factors that affect our survival. And! It is to be completely destroyed.

If the Taoist does not make a move, he will not make a move, and if he makes a move, it will be devastating.

This is the difference between Confucius and Lao Tzu on the view of governing the world.

Confucius talked about self-cultivation, not really self-cultivation, but purely self-cultivation for the sake of catering to social management. Everything must conform to the etiquette system, conform to the weekly etiquette, and cannot be exceeded.

The Taoist self-cultivation represented by Lao Tzu is truly self-cultivation, not purely (dogmatically) to cater to social management. Taoist self-cultivation is based on not violating the laws of society, not freedom without rules.

Taoist freedom is built on the basis of not affecting the lives and survival of others, and on the basis of not violating the social system. But! Other people and social systems have seriously affected the life and survival of Taoists, and Taoists will stand up against it.

Collision avoidance! It is on the basis of not affecting survival, not a complete and unconditional avoidance, not a bottomless avoidance. The bottom line of Taoism is survival! has affected the survival of Taoism, and this society is about to change the dynasty, and Taoism will stand up and rebel.

In fact! At this time, it is not only the Taoists who will come out to rebel, but all those whose survival is threatened will stand up.

Taoism also talks about self-cultivation, but Taoism is not purely (dogmatically) self-cultivation for the sake of catering to social management. Taoist self-cultivation is based on survival. In order to survive, Taoists obey the law and talk about "etiquette" and "reason", which is the same as Confucius's self-cultivation.

The difference is that Taoist self-cultivation is for oneself, not simply for the sake of catering to social management.

Simply for the sake of catering to social management, treating society and the state as a life-saving straw is, from a historical point of view, unreliable. If all countries and dynasties in history could be relied upon, could give the people a bite to eat, and guaranteed the people's right to live, there would be no change of dynasty in history.

Every change of dynasty in history is a struggle of the people for survival.

Confucius's proposition is to rely on the state, on the Zhou rites, no matter how chaotic the society is, he pursues principles, observes the Zhou rites, and abides by the etiquette system of the Zhou Dynasty. On the surface! It's very disciplined, but it's actually a kind of rigidity that won't be flexible. The final result will only be to suffer yourself.

How could we possibly do that in that troubled time?

In fact, it also proves that the later Confucius did not live well, hitting walls everywhere and being manipulated everywhere. If it weren't for the students who followed him to help him, his life would have been much worse.

In fact, it also proves that all of Confucius's students did not do what he did. Because! No one else can do it.

So! Why was Confucius able to do this?

In fact! Confucius couldn't have done it without those followers. You can't do it alone.

Taoism talks about self-cultivation, but Taoism is much freer. Taoism does not depend on other people and countries, and does not depend on anyone. First learn to be self-reliant, then not to break the law, and then to unite the people around you. When the state cannot give its people the right and security to live, it is the other way around!

So! Taoism is self-cultivation from the perspective of human nature. Confucianism, on the other hand, is self-cultivation from the perspective of social management.

Confucianism has always been prevalent because it caters to the ideas of managers. If there are people like Confucius in this world, they all abide by the law and do not break the law, and they would rather suffer themselves than rebel. So! Management can be ten thousand years.

And also! Some people with good brains can just use law-abiding people like Confucius to do things for themselves. It's the same as the manager's idea: if the world is full of people like Confucius, they all obey the law and don't break the law, and they would rather suffer themselves than rebel. So! Their enterprises, organizations, etc., can last for thousands of years. No! Their leadership will be held forever.

As the later Zhuangzi said in the article "Thieves": Even thieves have used Confucius's set.

It is precisely because anyone can use it that it is popular.

The self-cultivation of Laozi Taoism is from the perspective of human nature and the foundation of survival. Once Taoism can't survive, Taoism will rebel. So! Generations of social managers and leaders of all walks of life have not accepted it.

As a leader, who wants his subordinates to have "anti-heart"?

In fact! Taoists are not opposed for no reason, they are opposed on the premise that they cannot even guarantee survival. You don't give others the right to live anymore, and others don't oppose unless they are stupid.

And also! Does Taoism have a sense of social responsibility?

In fact! Needless to say! Why don't Taoists have a sense of social responsibility? Taoism obeys the law, is kind to others, and does not take credit, what harm does it do to society?

And also! All the people are Taoists, so why can't they defend the country? Why can't you resist the invasion of foreign enemies? Taoism is the most important thing about survival. The invasion of foreign enemies came, which seriously affected the bottom line of Taoism's survival, and once the country's call came, they did not respond to all the calls, and they all went to the front line. And! Taoist thought is still "all people are soldiers".

And also! Who said that there is no country in the home, there is no country?

The state has always existed, why is there no country?

Where there is a foreign enemy, there is the existence of the big institution of the state. So! The state exists for a certain period of time. Before the great convergence of the world, before the unification of human thought, nations existed.

Those who preach Taoism without a national perspective are deliberately smearing Taoism, or they have not really understood Taoism.

(End of chapter)