Dao AC

1. The bad news

A. Market economies are based on neurotic subjects who believe that produced
objects are real, produced vacancies and desires are fantasy and their own
exploitation is virtuous
Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari 1977 [Anti-Oedipus Pg. 26-29]
In point of fact, if desire is the lack of the real object, its very nature as a real entity depends upon an "essence
of lack" that produces the fantasized object. Desire thus conceived of as production, though merely the production of
fantasies, has been explained perfectly by psychoanalysis. On the very lowest level of interpretation, this means that the real object that
desire lacks is related to an extrinsic natural or social production, whereas desire intrinsically produces an imaginary object
that functions as a double of reality, as though there were a "dreamed-of object behind every real
object," or a mental production behind all real productions. This conception does not necessarily compel psychoanalysis to engage in a study of gadgets and markets, in the form of an utterly dreary and dull
psychoanalysis of the object: psychoanalytic studies of packages of noodles, cars, or "thingumajigs." But even when the fantasy is interpreted in depth, not simply as an object, but as a specific machine that brings desire itself
front and center, this machine is merely theatrical, and the complementarity of what it sets apart still remains: it is now need that is defined in terms of a relative lack and determined by its own object, whereas desire is regarded
as what produces the fantasy and produces itself by detaching itself from the object, though at the same time it intensifies the lack by making it absolute: an "incurable insufficiency of being," an "inability-to-be that is life itself."
Hence the presentation of desire as something supported by needs, while these needs, and their relationship to the object as something that is lacking or missing, continue to be the basis of the productivity of desire (theory of
an underlying support). In a word, when the theoretician reduces desiring-production to a production of fantasy, he is content to exploit to the fullest the idealist principle that defines desire as a lack, rather than a process of
production, of "industrial" production. Clement Rosset puts it very well: every time the emphasis is put on a lack that desire supposedly suffers from as a way of defining its object, "the world acquires as its double some other
sort of world, in accordance with the following line of argument: there is an object that desire feels the lack of; hence the world does not
contain each and every object that exists; there is at least one object missing, the one that desire
feels the lack of; hence there exists some other place that contains the key to desire (missing in this world)."29
If desire produces, its product is real. If desire is productive, it can be productive only in the real world and can produce only reality. Desire is the set of passive syntheses that engineer partial objects, flows, and bodies, and that
function as units of production. The real is the end product, the result of the passive syntheses of desire as autoproduction of the unconscious. Desire does not lack anything; it does not lack its object. It is, rather, the subject that
is missing in desire, or desire that lacks a fixed subject; there is no fixed subject unless there is repression. Desire and its object are one and the same thing: the machine, as a machine of a machine. Desire is a machine, and the
object of desire is another machine connected to it. Hence the product is something removed or deducted from the process of producing: between the act of producing and the product, something becomes detached, thus giving
the vagabond, nomad subject a residuum. The objective being of desire is the Real in and of itself. There is no particular form of existence that can be labeled "psychic reality." As Marx notes, what exists in fact is not lack, but
passion, as a "natural and sensuous object." Desire is not bolstered by needs, but rather the contrary; needs are derived from desire: they are counterproducts within the real that desire produces. Lack is a countereffect of
desire; it is deposited, distributed, vacuolized within a real that is natural and social. Desire always remains in close touch with the conditions of objective existence; it embraces them and follows them, shifts when they shift, and
does not outlive them. For that reason it so often becomes the desire to die, whereas need is a measure of the withdrawal of a subject that has lost its desire at the same time that it loses the passive syntheses of these
conditions. This is precisely the significance of need as a search in a void: hunting about, trying to capture or become a parasite of passive syntheses in whatever vague world they may happen to exist in. It is no use saying: We
are not green plants; we have long since been unable to synthesize chlorophyll, so it's necessary to eat Desire then becomes this abject fear of lacking something. But it should be noted that this is not a phrase uttered by the
poor or the dispossessed. On the contrary, such people know that they are close to grass, almost akin to it, and that desire "needs" very few thingsnot those leftovers that chance to come their way, but the very things that are
continually taken from themand that what is missing is not things a subject feels the lack of somewhere deep down inside himself, but rather the objectivity of man, the objective being of man, for whom to desire is to
produce, to produce within the realm of the real. The real is not impossible; on the contrary, within the real everything is possible, everything becomes possible. Desire does not express a molar lack within the subject; rather, the
molar organization deprives desire of its objective being. Revolutionaries, artists, and seers are content to be objective, merely objective: they know that desire clasps life
in its powerfully productive embrace, and reproduces it in a way that is all the more intense because it has few needs. And never mind those who believe that this is very easy to say,
or that it is the sort of idea to be found in books. "From the little reading I had done I had observed that the men who were most in life, who were moulding life, who
were life itself, ate little, slept little, owned little or nothing. They had no illusions about duty, or the
perpetuation of their kith and kin, or the preservation of the StateThe phantasmal world is the world which has
never been fully conquered over. It is the world of the past, never of the future. To move forward clinging to the past is like
dragging a ball and chain."30 The true visionary is a Spinoza in the garb of a Neapolitan revolutionary. We know very well where
lackand its subjective correlativecome from. Lack (manque)* is created, planned, and organized in and through social production. It is
counterproduced as a result of the pressure of antiproduction; the latter falls back on (serab at sur) the forces of production and appropriates
them. It is never primary; production is never organized on the basis of a pre-existing need or lack (manque). It
is lack that infiltrates itself, creates empty spaces or vacuoles, and propagates itself in accordance with the
organization of an already existing organization of production. The deliberate creation of lack as a function of
market economy is the art of a dominant class. This involves deliberately organizing wants and needs
(manque) amid an abundance of production; making all of desire teeter and fall victim to the great fear of not having one's needs satisfied;
and making the object dependent upon a real production that is supposedly exterior to desire (the
demands of rationality), while at the same time the production of desire is categorized as fantasy and nothing
but fantasy.
*+
Even the most repressive and the most deadly forms of social reproduction are produced by desire within the organization that is the consequence of such production under various conditions that we must analyze. That is why
the fundamental problem of political philosophy is still precisely the one that Spinoza saw so clearly, and that Wilhelm Reich rediscovered: "Why do men fight for their servitude as stubbornly as though it were their salvation?"
How can people possibly reach the point of shouting: "More taxes! Less bread!"? As Reich remarks, the astonishing thing is not that some people steal or
that others occasionally go out on strike, but rather that all those who are starving do not steal as a
regular practice, and all those who are exploited are not continually out on strike: after centuries of
exploitation, why do people still tolerate being humiliated and enslaved, to such a point, indeed, that they actually want humiliation and
slavery not only for others but for themselves? Reich is at his profoundest as a thinker when he refuses to accept ignorance or illusion on the part of the masses as an explanation of fascism, and demands an explanation that will
take their desires into account, an explanation formulated in terms of desire: no, the masses were not innocent dupes; at a certain point, under a certain set of conditions, they wanted fascism, and it is this perversion of the
desire of the masses that needs to be accounted for.31

B. This capitalist politics of lack caused the problems the aff is so concerned
about.
Ian Pindar and Paul Sutton, translators for a dead French person, 2000 ['The Three Ecologies' pg. 3-5]
In The Three Ecologies Guattari objects that we have challenged the Earth enough and are now on the brink of ecocide. After a
century of unparalleled scientific and technological progress we have made our presence known to the planet in the most dramatic
and self-defeating fashion. Had the Earths response to mans stimulation been as localized as it is in Conan Doyles story a
retaliatory spurt of black tar we would be safe; but instead we are faced with a very different kind of feedback: a
bewilderingly complex array of interrelated and unpredictability erratic fluctuations over
which we have little or no control and which remind us that the whole world is a giant
ecosystem with a sensitive biosphere that has taken 4.5 billion years to evolve.
Our Challenger-like contempt for nature has driven thousands of species to extinction already, insects, other invertebrates and
micro-organisms in the main, although birds and larger mammals such as the elephant and the tiger are also at risk, and it is not
fanciful to suppose that eventually we might deprive even ourselves of an ecological niche. The
Earths environment is composed of a multiplicity of such niches, each of which is a potential
home for life forms. (As Guattari reminds us, the etymology of eco is the Greek word oikos, meaning home.) We have
upset the delicate symbiosis between ourselves and nature, with largely unforeseeable results.
In the oceans, for instance, overfishing, increased pollution, and rising temperatures as a result of
human activity have resulted in the spread of unknown or unidentified infectious agents
that have led to the mass mortality of fish, sea mammals, tropical corals and sea-water plants.
The biodiversity of the oceans is seriously threatened by mysterious pathogens viruses, bacteria, fungi and other parasites that wipe out whole populations. These pathogens are making cross-species leaps of
the sort that the Professor Challenger of A Thousand Plateaus would be better able to explain, and have exploded the popular belief that the Earths oceans are so vast they would remain relatively immune from
mankinds influence. Whereas Nietzsche could still find comfort in the analogy of the world as a sea of forces that never expands itself, eternally flooding back (the sea will cast it up again), we can have no
such faith in our diseased and toxic oceans with their oil slicks and giant algae blooms visible from space. There can be little doubt that around the world
increased pollution, global warming, deforestation, desertification and the loss of biodiversity
are anthropogenic, or that the motor of this generalized impoverishment of the biosphere is
capitalism.

C. We have front row seats for the end of the world - peak oil combined with
rising demand and population growth is an inescapable equation for
apocalypse.
Hans Tammemagi, writer for the Vancouver Sun, 2008 [accessed 6/28/08 from http://ww.w
canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=2eeece50-285f-4c4b- bb,37-2d053d04d4e8]
The period from 1950 to 2000 will be remembered as the Golden Era of modern civilization, the pinnacle reached by humans after a
million years of evolution. This brilliant half-century was sponsored largely by fossil fuels, especially oil, which brought
unprecedented economic growth, plentiful transportation and a rich and diverse lifestyle.
But the new millennium has brought the end of cheap oil, and civilization is suddenly teetering on the edge of collapse. Even if we
manage to scrape through (and it would require heroic efforts), life will change. We're at one of the most important turning points in
history, yet we persistently ignore the coming meltdown and just want to party on. Nero would be proud.
So, why is civilization teetering?
First, peak oil has arrived. There is no better signal than the price of oil, which has skyrocketed
past $130 and shows no sign of slowing. Some shrug and claim there's still a lot left, technology will find it and extract it. Others, as
represented by the editors of Maclean's magazine, feel that we have grappled with costly oil before and by applying determined
conservation and new efficiencies, we will cope.
Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Peak oil, this two-syllable piece of jargon, is another way of saying we are on the threshold of a major crisis.
From now on the supply of oil will diminish each year, but population and demand will continue
to grow. This is truly frightening because our modern industrial society is built on and totally
dependent on this versatile fuel. It is the foundation for transportation, industry, agriculture,
fishing and much more. As the gap between what economies and nations need and what they
can get widens, bidding wars will erupt (they already have) and then shooting wars (one already has).
The globe is in for tough times because renewables like wind and solar simply can't be supplied in enough
quantity to fill the enormous demand. As an aside, environmental organizations are doing an
enormous disservice by promoting the fantasy of a feasible renewable energy and hydrogen
economy.
Second, the world is facing a major food shortage. It took two centuries but the Malthusian Devil is finally
banging on the door. For seven of the past eight years global production of cereal grains has not met consumption. The price of
cereal crops such as rice, corn and wheat has doubled in the past year. Poor countries are
hardest hit and food riots have broken out in more than 10 countries including Egypt, Cameroon,
Morocco and Indonesia.
The United Nations recently announced that large segments of the world face immediate hunger now, and global food production
must be doubled in the next 30 years.
But how is this possible? There are no empty lands to cultivate and agriculture is highly dependent on
oil and gas to power machinery, to make pesticides and fertilizers and for shipping. Food prices are rising in lock-step with the
price of oil. And now another body blow: the mad rush to harvest cereal grains like corn to make biofuels for cars rather than food
for people.
The world's food situation is deadly grim, and it can only get worse, since we are adding 70 million more people to the planet every
year.
As though the oil and food crises weren't enough, we're also staring down the throat of global warming, the
most insidious threat ever faced by humans. Yet our efforts to curb carbon emissions are
laughable and pathetic. It's an interesting insight into our human psyche that we can ignore such a serious problem.

2. Advocacy

We must forge a new collective subjectivity founded on the only truly
renewable resource: personal energy, the force that courses through life and
animates matter. Accepting as inevitable the lacking subject of capitalism that
is doomed to consume results in the worst violence.
Mark Seem, translator for dead French theorists, 1977 [Anti-Oedipus pg. XX-XXIV]
To be anti-oedipal is to be anti-ego as well as anti-homo, willfully attacking all reductive psychoanalytic and political analyses that remain caught within the sphere of totality and unity, in order to free the
multiplicity of desire from the deadly neurotic and Oedipal yoke. For Oedipus is not a mere psychoanalytic construct, Deleuze and Guattari explain. Oedipus is the figurehead of imperialism, "colonization pursued
by other means, it is the interior colony, and we shall see that even here at home ... it is our intimate colonial education." This internalization of man by man, this "oedipalization," creates a new meaning for
suffering, internal suffering, and a new tone for life: the depressive tone. Now depression does not just come about one fine day, Anti-Oedipus goes on, nor does Oedipus appear one day in the Family and feel
secure in remaining there. Depression and Oedipus are agencies of the State, agencies of paranoia, agencies of power, long before being delegated to the family. Oedipus is the figure of power as such, just as
neurosis is the result of power on individuals. Oedipus is everywhere. For anti-oedipalists the ego, like Oedipus, is "part of those things we must
dismantle through the united assault of analytical and political forces ."4 Oedipus is belief injected into
the unconscious, it is what gives us faith as it robs us of power, it is what teaches us to desire our own repression. Everybody
has been oedipalized and neuroticized at home, at school, at work. Everybody wants to be a
fascist. Deleuze and Guattari want to know how these beliefs succeed in taking hold of a body, thereby silencing the productive
machines of the libido. They also want to know how the opposite situation is brought about, where a body successfully wards off the
effects of power. Reversing the Freudian distinction between neurosis and psychosis that measures everything against the former,
Anti-Oedipus concludes: the neurotic is the one on whom the Oedipal imprints take, whereas the psychotic is the one incapable of
being oedipalized, even and especially by psychoanalysis. The first task of the revolutionary, they add, is to learn
from the psychotic how to shake off the Oedipal yoke and the effects of power, in order to initiate a
radical politics of desire freed from all beliefs. Such a politics dissolves the mystifications of
power through the kindling, on all levels, of anti-oedipal forcesthe schizzes-flowsforces that escape
coding, scramble the codes, and flee in all directions: orphans (no daddy-mommy-me), atheists (no
beliefs), and nomads (no habits, no territories).
A schizoanalysis schizophrenizes in order to break the holds of power and institute research into a new collective subjectivity and a
revolutionary healing of mankind. For we are sick, so sick, of our selves!
It is actually not accurate to say that Deleuze and Guattari develop the schizoanalytic approach, for, as they show, it has always been
at work in writers like Miller or Nietzsche or Artaud. Stoned thinking based on intensely lived experiences: Pop Philosophy.
To put it simply, as does Miller, "everybody becomes a healer the moment he forgets about himself." And
Miller continues: "Reality is here and now, everywhere, gleaming through every reflection that meets the eye. . . . Everybody is a
neurotic, down to the last man and woman. The healer, or the analyst, if you like, is only a super-neurotic. ... To be cured we
must rise from our graves and throw off the cerements of the dead. Nobody can do it for
anotherit is a private affair which is best done collectively."5 Once we forget about our egos a non-neurotic form of politics becomes
possible, where singularity and collectivity are no longer at odds with each other, and where collective expressions of desire are possible. Such a politics does not seek to regiment individuals according to a
totalitarian system of norms, but to de-normalize and de-individualize through a multiplicity of new, collective arrangements against power. Its goal is the transformation of human relationships in a struggle
against power. And it urges militant groups, as well as lone individuals, to analyze and fight against the effects of power that subjugate them: "For a revolutionary group at the preconscious level remains a
subjugated group, even in seizing power, as long as this power itself refers to a form of force that continues to enslave and crush desiring-production. ... A subject-group, on the contrary, is a group whose libidinal
investments are themselves revolutionary, it causes desire to penetrate into the social field, and subordinates the socius or the forms of power to desiring-production; productive of desire and a desire that
produces, the subject-group always invents mortal forma tions that exorcize the effusion in it of a death instinct; it opposes real coefficients of transversality to the symbolic determinations of subjuga- tion,
coefficients without a hierarchy or a group superego." There can be no revolutionary actions, Anti-Oedipus concludes, where the the rela- tions between people and groups are relations of exclusion and segrega-
tion. Groups must multiply and connect in ever new ways, freeing up territorialities for the construction of new social arrangements. Theory must therefore be conceived as a toolbox, producing tools that work; or
as Ivan Illich says, we must learn to construct tools for conviviality through the use of counterfoil research.6 When Illich speaks of "conviv- ial reconstruction," he is very close to Deleuze and Guattari's notion of a
"desiring-revolution." Like Deleuze and Guattari, Illich also calls for a radical reversal of the relationships between individuals and tools or machines: "This reversal would permit the evolution of a life-style and of a
political system which give priority to the protection, the maximum use, and the enjoyment of the one resource that is almost equally distributed among all people: personal energy under personal control."7 All
three authors agree that such a reversal must be governed by a collective political process, and not by professionals and experts. The ultimate answer to neurotic dependencies on professionals is mutual self-care.

Thus I affirm environmental protection is only possible through the re-framing of subjectivity.

3. Framework
I defend Daoism as a strategy for producing a non-capitalist subjectivity that exists in harmony
with the ebb and flow of the cosmos - the current ecological crises are not due to poor
technology or improper policy but a fundamentally flawed set of ideas concerning the sovereign
human will and the necessity of implementing it to manage nature.

A. Only embracing the Daoist ethic of wu-wei or non-action allows the natural
order of the universe to manifest itself.
Zhang 2001 (Jiyu, a 65th generation direct descendant of the founder of the Daoist religion, the first celestial master Zhang
Daoling. Vice President of the Chinese Daoist Association and editor-in-chief of the magazine Chinese Daoism, published in Beijing)
A Declaration of the Chinese Daoist Association on Global Ecology: Daoism and Ecology: Ways within a Cosmic Landscape (p. 364-
367)
As humans face an ecological crisis throughout the world, they realize increasingly that problems
concerning environmental protection are not derived from industrial pollution or
technological expansion alone. Rather, these problems are also derived from peoples worldviews,
ideas of value, or theories of knowledge. This is because the powerful industrial and technological expansion across
the world has also generated systems of value and theories of knowledge affecting peoples ideas about the world. These ideas have
conditioned peoples thought-patterns and have caused a split in their minds regarding the unity between humans and nature.
These thought-patterns of contemporary people exaggerate the subjective will, causing people to think that nature can be treated
as subservient to the willful desires of humans and that nature would never respond negatively to these conditions. Although
these contemporary thought-patterns have achieved a high degree of social productivity
throughout the world, they have also given humankind a greatly inflated image of itself.
Daoists believe that this inflated image of the self is an important cause of the serious
ecological crisis confronting the modern world. Today as we face the real possibility of imminent world destruction, we should soberly examine these dominant thought-patterns associated
with the contemporary worldview.
We believe that the ancient doctrines of Daoism are eminently able to remedy the deficiencies caused by contemporary ethical theories. According to Daoism, Heaven, Earth, humankind, and all things in the
universe including birds, animals, insects, trees, grass, and other existing entities come into being through the transformation of the breath of Dao (daoqi). By endowing various degrees of pure or turbid breath
gives rise to individual things. As a result, a diversity of existing beings is formed in the world. Human beings, composed of the blending of the breath of Heaven within the breath of Earth, are the most spiritual
and intelligent creatures among the myriad things. They are one of the four fundamentals of the universe (Dao, Heaven, Earth, humankind). How should humankind deal with the myriad things of the universe? Let
us return to the ancient Daode jing for the answer. Since the text asserts that Dao models itself after the natural, it follows that men or women should model
themselves after the earth which they inhabit. By the same token, Earth modeling itself after
Heaven means it must be in tune with the changes of the universe. And Heaven modeling
after the natural means that it must follow the operations of Nature operating
spontaneously in accordance with its self-so (ziran) character. This also means that human beings must not
employ contrivances to coerce the self-so character of Nature to conform to human desires. Humans must nurture the
spontaneous character of non-action (wuwei) Dao modeling after the natural in the innermost part of
their hearts and practice it unceasingly. Only by so doing can humans solve the global
ecological crisis. And if these problems of the natural environment are solved, then the well-
being of humankind is assured.
The Lord of the Most High leaves it to us to emulate the doctrine of self-so (ziran), that is, non-action (wuwei) revealed in nature.
Another teaching of Daoism, concerning the relationship between humans and nature is: To be in accord with the eternal *Dao+
means to be enlightened. To know the eternal is called enlightenment. Closely related to this Daoist sayings is: Not to know
the eternal [Dao] is to act blindly which results in disaster. Now we shall attempt to apply this group of Daoist sayings to ecological
considerations. Thus, To be in accord with the eternal *Dao+ means to be enlightened denotes the fact that the myriad things of the world are mutually connected and interdependent, and that people must
maintain a harmonious relationship among things in order to enhance their longevity. Daoism affirms that each of the myriad things contain the polarity of yin and yang and that life is engendered only when each
things yin-yang poles are allowed to commune with each other. In other words, the viability of life depends upon the mutual harmony of
the yin-yang polarity of all things. This also means that the continuous development of world
civilization depends on the harmonious relationship among all things. People who understand this
principle can be called wise persons. Conversely, those who do not understand this principle or violate it contradicting this
teaching through human contrivances, breaking the laws of nature, destroying a species by artificial means, or promoting the
overproduction of a certain species of things are the violators of the principle of Dao.
The Daoist classic, Baopuzi (The Master Who Embraces Simplicity), a work of the fourth century C.E., makes a distinction between two kinds of people concerning their relation with nature: one type is called
those who enslave the myriad things and the other is called those who emulate nature. It says that the Dao, which creates the myriad things through the principle of self-so, makes humans the most
intelligent beings among all the creatures of the earth. Those who have only a superficial understanding of the relationship between people and nature are the ones who enslave the myriad things. They
subjugate nature completely to themselves. Contrariwise, people who have a profound insight into the mystery of the relationship between humans and nature are friends of nature and derive their
understanding of longevity from nature by meditative observation and gazing. Because people know nature, they understand that turtles and cranes live long lives. Therefore, they try to emulate the callisthenic
methods of the turtles and cranes in order to strengthen their bodies.
From a long range perspective, the abuse of Nature will result in a disastrous destruction of our natural environment. Chapter 6 of the Baopuzi provides the following passages regarding this issue:
Flying birds are shot with bullets, the pregnant are disemboweled and their eggs are broken. When there is hunting by firearm in spring and summerEach of these destructive actions constitutes one sin, and
according to its severity the Controller of Destiny will deduct a certain amount from ones life (ones natural destiny or longevity). A person dies when there are no more units of time left in ones life. Contrarily,
if one treats things with compassion, forgives others as one wishes others to forgive oneself, is benevolent even to the creeping insectsharms no living thingsIn this way, one becomes a person of high virtue
and will be blessed by Heaven. Ones undertakings are sure to be successful, and the desire to be an immortal will be obtained. Prosperity and longevity fall upon
one who extends her love to the myriad things in the natural world.
The passage, He who knows when to stop is free from danger. He who is contented suffers no disgrace,
is important for ecological ethics. He who knows when to stop is free from danger refers to the fact that there are
limits in the natural environment as to how much abuse Nature can take from human beings.
This consideration necessarily calls for human restraint against any act which might interfere with the ecological balance even if
that action might generate a huge immediate profit. In this way, we can avoid Natures retaliation, prevent a long-term disaster for
the sake of some immediate gain, or escape the predicament of losing what we have already gained. He who is contented suffers
no disgrace means that people should have a correct understanding of what success means. One should realize that in order to
avoid the overproduction of natural resources, one must not pursue material benefits in an
unsatiable way. The Taiping jing (Scripture of Great Peace) contains a passage conveying the importance of conserving natural
resources for the production of wealth. It proposes that the criterion of wealth depends upon whether or not
a society can protect the ability of all natures species of things to grow and prosper. The passage
says: the sage-king teaches that people should assist Heaven to produce living things and assist Earth by giving nourishment to
things to form proper shapes. Wealth requires that the living things under Heaven and of the world are all allowed to grow and
flourish.

B. We must abandon the western practice of conflating the discrete objects of
grammar, science and law with reality there is only the immanent unity of the
Dao.
Alan Watts, 95 teacher of eastern religion and philosophy, Philosopher of Western Culture, Tao the Water Color Way, 41-44.
Thus the Tao is the course, the flow, the drift, or the process of nature, and I call it the Watercourse Way because both Lao-tzu and
Chuang-tzu use the flow of water as its principal metaphor. But it is of the essence of their philosophy that the Tao cannot be
defined in words and is not an idea or concept. As Chuang-tzu says, It may be attained but not seen, or, in other words, felt
but not conceived, intuited but not categorized, divined but not explained. In a similar way,
air and water cannot be cut or clutched, and their flow ceases when they are enclosed. There
is no way of putting a stream in a bucket or the wind in a bag. Verbal description and definition may be
compared to the latitudinal and longitudinal nets which we visualize upon the earth and the heavens to define and enclose the
positions of mountains and lakes, planets and stars. But earth and heaven are not cut by these imaginary strings. As Wittgenstein
said, Laws, like the law of causation, etc., treat of the network and not of what the network describes. For the game of
Western philosophy and science is to trap the universe in the networks of words and numbers, so
that there is always the temptation to confuse the rules, or laws, of grammar and mathematics with the
actual operations of nature. We must not, however, overlook the fact that human calculation is also an
operation of nature, but just as trees do not represent or symbolize rocks, our thoughts even if
intended to do so do not necessarily represent trees and rocks. Thoughts grow in brains as grass grows in fields. Any correspondence between
them is abstract, as between ten roses and ten stones, which does not take into account the smell and color of the roses or the shapes and structures of thestones. Although thought is in nature, we must not
confuse the game-rules of thought with the patterns of nature.
The principle is that if everything is allowed to go its own way the harmony of the universe will be established, since every process in the world can do its own thing only in relation to all others. The political
analogy is Kropotkins anarchism the theory that if people are left alone to do as they please, to follow their nature and discover what truly pleases them, a social order will emerge of itself. Individuality is
inseparable from community. In other words, the order of nature is not a forced order; it is not the result of laws and
commandments which beings are compelled to obey by external violence, for in the Taoist
view there really is no obdurately external world. My inside arises mutually with my outside,
and though the two may differ they cannot be separated.

C. Alt: reject all rhetoric that does not have as its motive harmonious existence
in the Dao.
Combs, 2005 [Steven C. The Dao ofRhetoric, Assoc. ProfofComm@Loyola MarymOlIDt University, pg. 149]
Daoist rhetoric opens exciting avenues for theory, criticism, and social action. Yet it must be remembered that
Daoism is truly energized when it is put into practice and it can be valuable at the most
mundane levels of existence. Daoism teaches me to look to myself first when I want to make
the world a better place. It places responsibility on me to cherish the natural world. It reminds me that I am vitally
connected to everything else and my smallest act affects the entire universe. It helps me avoid extremes and work with the flow of
everything else. It comforts me because change is inevitable and necessary. It encourages me to
seek balance and unity in my mind, body, and spirit. It predisposes me to empathy. It reminds
me that nothing is destined, anything Is possible, and everything I do is an act of creation.


D. Solvency: Daoism changes the way we conceive economies of valuation in all
aspects of life.
Giradot, Miller, Xiaogan 2001 (N.J., professor of comparative religion and Leigh University; James, PhD research
in Daoism at Queens University; Liu, PhD @ Beijing University. Daoism and Ecology.)
Daoism proposes a comprehensive and radical restructuring of the way in which we conceive of our relationship to nature and our
cosmic environment. This imaginative act does not readily lend itself to the solution of the problems
of modern society except inasmuch as it challenges the very foundations of our economic,
political, scientific and intellectual structures . At the same time, however, as Daoism becomes
more influential in the West, even as it is misunderstood, it surely exerts a positive influence
with respect to understanding what it means to be embedded in a cosmic landscape. In such an
understanding, nature is not something outside of us to be dealt with after the fashion of a
mechanic repairing a car, but is both a mental attitude to be carefully cultivated and the true
condition of ones body, which contains the infinite dimensions of cosmic reality within itself. Ultimately, nature is to be
constructed and visualized time and again. The terrain of our most authentic ecological concern,
therefore, is first and foremost the landscape of the religious imagination.

Thus, I affirm.

underview

1. I advocate the alt for both developed and developing countries. Dont let the
neg say I have to specify agency to developing countries only:
A. Text part of the aff action is the resolution which demonstrates its truth. I affirm that
developing countries should prioritize environmental protection, but also that they arent the
only ones.
B. Reasonability It follows that if there are general philosophical reasons for developing
countries to prioritize environmental protection, those reasons could also apply to others.

2. If they win a violation, it doesnt matter. Extend Watts and Giradot who both
prove that the pedagogical character of our debate matters more than the
objects it describes. Use the ballot to do the alt and benefit from its pre-fiat
advantages.