QUOTES:

Military strategy is a very particular form of knowledge or philosophy that I believe has incredible relevance to any conflict and to all kinds of situations that we encounter in everyday life.

Over the centuries, all kinds of brilliant ideas have evolved about how to fight wars in the most efficient manner. These ideas have been collected to form a body of military knowledge. On occasion, these ideas have been written down in various pamphlets and manuals, the most famous of which is Sun Tzu's "Art of War." However, this knowledge was never studied in universities, and these books were never read by the public at large. Instead, this massive information on the art of war was jealously guarded and hoarded by the elites who ran a country. For instance, a king or ruler would have a copy of Sun Tzu's "Art of War." He would keep it by his bedside, read it, and share it with his closest advisors and top military men. These few men would meet occasionally to discuss the ideas and how to apply them to the wars and situations they were facing. The officers and soldiers in an army would study tactics—tactics being the art of dealing with the immediate needs and problems of an army—but they were rigorously excluded from any study of the broader subject of strategy. The same thing prevailed in the culture of the country at large. Educated elites could read books on all kinds of abstract spiritual matters and philosophy, but they could never get their hands on books like "The Art of War."

Contained in this knowledge were brilliant ideas on how to take any kind of negative situation and turn it into a positive one, how to identify the psychological weaknesses in your opponent and play on those weaknesses to get the enemy to defeat themselves, and how to organize your army and inspire it to fight. Essentially, military strategy is a bridge between an idea and its transformation into reality. It is what I call the ultimate practical philosophy.

Military strategy represented a kind of stairway that elites could climb to elevate themselves above stressful and confusing situations, gaining perspective on the entire battlefield and everything that was going on, having clarity about the situation, acting with purpose and direction, and getting control of the situation.

In fact, nothing has changed.

We live in a culture that tends to promote certain values and ideals: getting along with others, cooperating, being a team player, and avoiding conflict or confrontation. These are values of peace. War, on the other hand, is seen as something dark and sinister, a relic of our barbaric past. For a modern democracy, war is a necessary evil, and as a necessary evil, we have a military—a group of specialists who study and wage wars for us. It's almost as if we erect this solid barrier: on one side, we have the military, and on the other side, we have social or private life.

The art of war is to win with minimum bloodshed and violence. If winning a war requires shedding a lot of blood, you must not fight that war. The closest an artist of war tries to get to this ideal is to resolve conflict in a sane and rational manner. A person steeped in the art of war knows how to avoid petty entanglements, how to choose battles carefully, and ultimately creates less conflict, resistance, and problems.

Compared to the lives of our parents and grandparents, the world we inhabit is much more competitive and nastier than anything they ever knew. Society has splintered into all sorts of groups, leading to business wars, culture wars, internet wars, and political wars. In many groups, people no longer have strong ties to the company, nation, or group they belong to. Inevitably, in this competitive environment, people think first and foremost about themselves and their own interests, which often clash with the interests of the group. Spread this globally, and you have millions of people creating power struggles in environments like companies, which never existed before.

Additionally, because this culture frowns upon overt aggression, many people revert to passive aggression to get what they want. They become sly and manipulative, operating like guerrilla warriors in a social environment. When you add all of this—the newness of this phenomenon, the confusion of different battles, and the subtlety with which people now fight—you have a very dangerous and difficult environment to navigate.

What tends to happen is that people become very tactical. Tactics, in this sense, means dealing with immediate problems, reacting to what people are giving us. I call this "tactical hell." Once you get into tactical hell, constantly reacting to others, it's extremely difficult to get out of it.

We could benefit immensely from a mental transformation where we rise above this confusion, gaining perspective and clarity—precisely what military strategy is designed to provide.

My discussion of war is not a moral issue; it is a power issue.

My solution to getting you out of tactical hell is based on a premise: strategy is not formulaic. Most people think of strategy as memorizing points A, B, and C, then applying them. That’s formulaic thinking, tactical thinking disguised as strategy. Strategy is, in fact, a philosophy—a way of looking at the world.

Musashi's opponents depended on their incredible weapons, their techniques. They repeated these techniques in each battle, which is equivalent to fighting the last war—something very physical and mechanical. Musashi was the exact opposite. He never did the same thing twice. Each time he fought an opponent, he studied them and determined their weakness, adapting his strategy accordingly. He was unpredictable.

The difference between strategic and non-strategic thinking is significant. Most people depend on something physical—more money, more friends, more power, more influence. A person who uses strategy depends on creativity in the moment, learning about the particular battle to gain an advantage.

Every battle is won or lost before it is ever fought.

If your mind is filled with ideas from the past, if you repeat the same formulas, you have already lost the war. If you ground yourself in the idea of not fighting the last war—which is the foundation of all solid strategic thinking—you have already won the war before it happens.

In ancient Greece, carpenters, architects, navigators, and politicians would go to a temple to Athena and pray. They were not praying for luck but for Athena's spirit to inhabit them, giving them the wisdom and clarity to succeed. Athena hated warfare; she liked winning. She believed that being aggressive and fighting wasn't the answer—being smart and intelligent was. The owl, symbolizing wisdom, represents Athena’s ability to see farther and wider than any other creature.

Praying to Athena was about embodying her spirit—calmness, detachment, the ability to see more of what was going on, and her dynamic mental powers. This is what I refer to as grand strategy.

Most people think in terms of immediate battles. The idea in grand strategy is to lose battles but win the war, thinking in terms of several years down the line and crafting a powerful, rational campaign.

Whenever you are about to enter a battle, instead of rushing forward, take a step back. Take in more of the environment, think deeply about the social and cultural circumstances, and look at your enemy through their eyes. With this heightened perspective, you can develop a completely new strategy.

Most people, when they look at the Iraq War, begin there. I looked further back in time at the Desert Storm experience. George W. Bush had an obsession with his father and was determined not to repeat his mistakes. I’m not saying emotions drove us into Iraq, but they colored our strategy.

In the history of war, you see what you want to see in intelligence.

Resolve is important in warfare, but if it's not allied with intelligence, it becomes stubbornness.

When emotions swirl in the back of your mind, you create strategies unrelated to reality.

I believe war is related to society and that deeper social problems are at play. Everyone thinks they have a strategy, but emotions color their plans. Mike Tyson said, "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face." Leaders think they know what's going on, but emotions subtly infect their strategies.

I follow the Napoleonic ideal: the structure of your organization is the most important strategic decision. A dysfunctional organization cannot execute a good strategy.

If there’s one takeaway from this book, it’s that in any conflict, what prevails is not the physical—it’s the strategy, the creativity, and the mental aspect. You can lose everything, but if you know the art of war, you will prevail.

War is an amoral environment. Intentions don’t matter; effectiveness does.

War is about having a fighting method adapted to your environment.

If your army is motivated and inspired, you have three times the force of another army.

Strategy can be boiled down to how close your mind gets to reality. The closer your mind gets to reality, the better your strategy. If you live in a bubble with your own ideas, your strategy will misfire unless you have great luck. To be realistic, meld your mind with what’s going on around you.

Zrzeczenie się Praw Własności i Klauzula Użycia Edukacyjnego

Prezentowane na tej platformie treści, w tym m.in. transkrybowane cytaty, nie są naszą własnością. Wszelkie prawa i własność do opublikowanych treści należą do oficjalnych autorów i twórców odpowiednich kanałów YouTube i Spotify, z których pochodzą te treści. Materiał ten jest udostępniany wyłącznie w celach edukacyjnych. Nie rościmy sobie żadnych praw własności ani autorstwa tych treści i uznajemy, że pozostają one własnością intelektualną ich odpowiednich właścicieli.