Following Up

June 26th, 2009 by zen

  • Rome conquered the Mediterranean world, driven by self-confident belief in their fitness to rule others.
  • Men like Pizzaro and Cortes conquered much of the world for Spain and Christ.
  • The British Empire was built by men like Robert Clive and Warren Hastings, whose acquisitive drive and energy brought India into the British Empire – often without instructions or even against their government’s wishes.
  • Nineteenth century Americans felt it was their manifest destiny to extend America from ocean to ocean.

We can describe these as “grand strategies”, but to do so has an element of falsity. Such intellectual analysis, based on theory, had no place in the hearts of these peoples. History also suggests than leaders cannot manufacture a primal strategy. You either have it, or you do not.

Page 2 of 2 | Previous page

Posted in A.E., blogosphere, Blogroll, foreign policy, intellectuals, national security, strategy, Strategy and War, theory, war | 2 comments

Previous post:
Next post:

  1. Fabius Maximus:

    June 26th, 2009 at 3:05 pm

    The comparison with Phillip II is telling.  We might not "have suffered as much" merely because we have a larger credit line.  That is, we get to dig ourselves into a deeper hole of debt than he did.  But the outcome — some form of default — might be the same in both cases.  In which case we might envy Phil.  He was lucky to have bankers that shut down his borrowing relatively early.  Like having buddies that say "friends don’t let friends drive drunk."
    .
    For more about Phil’s financial problems, see this:
    http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/webfac/cromer/e211_f07/voth.pdf

  2. A.E.:

    June 26th, 2009 at 7:20 pm

    FM’s "primal strategy" post is a classic and I have referenced it often when describing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and insurgent war.