All strategy, East or West, knows how to use force and deception. But the crucial question is: to what end?
https://x.com/nxt888/status/1973860089129009170
All strategy, East or West, knows how to use force and deception.
But the crucial question is: to what end?
Sun Tzu’s ruthlessness was about defending one’s state from destruction, not carving up someone else’s.
He taught that the highest form of victory was to win without fighting, to preserve both one’s own strength and even the enemy’s people if possible.
His logic was grounded in survival, not endless conquest. The discipline he imposed, even when harsh, was meant to ensure cohesion against annihilation.
Machiavelli is obsessed with the prince: how to rule, how to manipulate, how to cling to power no matter the cost.
His advice is not about defense, but about the maintenance of domination. It is about lies, fear, and cruelty as tools for control.
Where Sun Tzu sees deception as a means to avoid war, Machiavelli embraces deceit as the very currency of politics.
Sun Tzu is obsessed with the state: how to survive, how to outlast, how to win without destruction if possible.
He belongs to a tradition that values harmony between ruler and ruled, and that sees war as an exceptional, dangerous act to be ended swiftly.
Machiavelli belongs to a tradition that sanctifies the will of rulers, even at the expense of their own people.
Even today, you see the difference. America invades, occupies, redraws borders, calls it "order."
It wages wars that shatter nations and then proclaims itself the arbiter of peace.
Its Machiavellian inheritance is plain: power through perpetual disruption, always at others’ expense.
China fortifies, defends, survives, and waits.
Its strategy has always been endurance, not expansion for its own sake.
It weathers storms, consolidates, and turns time itself into a weapon.
The patience of survival is very different from the aggression of plunder.
Both are cold when threatened, but only one builds its glory on the ashes of others.
And that difference matters, because it shapes not only military strategy, but entire civilizations.
Sovereignty is power, yes. But some wield power to erase others’ sovereignty, and some wield it to prevent their own erasure.
This is the line that divides imperial domination from national defense, exploitation from survival.
You want modern examples? Compare the Belt and Road to Iraq and Libya.
One builds, the other bombs.
One extends influence by constructing ports, roads, and railways.
The other leaves behind mass graves and ruined cities.
Both are forms of power projection, but they leave radically different legacies.
I am not romanticizing anyone. I am telling you where the line is, and why it matters.
posted by Satish Sharma at
05:04
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home