This week on the blog, we keep up our look at the (silly) idea of there being a 'universal' set of warrior values or combat experience by talking about the types of warfare, along with the experience of battle itself in different cultures.https://acoup.blog/2021/02/05/collections-the-universal-warrior-part-iia-the-many-faces-of-battle/ …
-
It's ancillary to your thesis here but my interpretation of Fallout's "war never changes" was in reference to a point of the motivations for war - security, resources, etc - never changing. Is this accurate your estimation?
Thucydides is, I think, correct on the causes of war, though the three he gives might be present in different amounts in different wars. On that same point, check out Azar Gat, War in Human Civilization.https://acoup.blog/2019/12/05/collections-a-trip-through-thucydides-fear-honor-and-interest/ …
-
-
I am not arguing flatly that there are no constants in war, to be clear. Clausewitz is broadly applicable for instance, even to different systems of war. On this I think so is Thucydides.
-
But all of that just adds up to the idea that "all wars share human beings in common" which is true and important but doesn't get one to a life philosophy, a warrior archetype, a universal warrior or any of that stuff. It just tells you that human nature is a factor in war.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.