Tag: The Art of War

If you were reading along with me, then you as well have now read another ‘classic’. This is definitely the first time for me reading the Art of War. I have heard a whole lot of references to the book over the years. Now I can contribute my own opinion on it is worth to the average person.

I am kind of a funny guy. I have extreme reverence for some old things. Architecture is an example of that. But when it comes to books and media, it turns out that I am a skeptic.

Throughout my academic life, I can remember reading things like The Iliad, Shakespeare and Moby Dick. I would say that they have an important role in literature because of their existence. As far as being great works, that is definitely debatable in my opinion. Each surviving work provided a framework and story lines to supplement new work.

Sticking closer to the subject, I see Art of War as a similar comparison. If you were studying military history then this is a very important work. It has shaped military tactics and thoughts for thousands of years. But, aside from that I really don’t see a lot of value to the non-military, non-historian, modern man.

I read that there have been attempts to turn the study of Art of War into some sort of business philosophy. I fail to see the connection unless you are going to make metaphors for terrain and feudal leadership to other situations. Certain authors like Ayn Rand and George Orwell clearly are using innuendo to make a point. I really don’t believe that Sun Tzu was using military terms for guiding the modern business man, especially because this incarnation did not really exist.

Was the book worth reading? From a standpoint of checking a classic off of the list, yes. From the standpoint of getting a lot of insight from the book, no. This book is for military historians and the Sinophile. It doesn’t hurt to read these short chapters and try to rationalize what is written as a thought exercise. I wouldn’t expect it to change your life in any meaningful way however.

I know that when I started this, I talked about how this was a book of several. I heard a conflicting version that Art of War was an amalgamation of different authors. This was pieced together from oral legend and ancient text fragments. Sawyer goes through a lot of effort to justify credit of Sun Tzu to the work. You can make similar claims about the Bible whereas the difference is the application. It is the subject and not the author that makes the book valuable.

End Your Programming Routine: I was listening to the Art of Manliness podcast and I heard this statement “negative people are perceived as smarter”. I don’t think of myself as negative. But, if you are skeptical and open minded then you are much more likely to keep searching for the truth. Whereas if you just accept something at face value then you are susceptible to any rumor that you run across. Read Art of War and decide for yourself. You got my opinion.

We have reached the end of another classic tome. You will get my full opinion on the overall book next week. If you have been following along, then you probably can guess where I am going to go with this. But for now, we have one more chapter to get through.

I get the sense that what Sun Tzu is implying is that the use of spies will help shorten the war. But it is the beginning of the chapter that caught my eye. Continuous fighting is extremely costly. First and foremost, it effects the men that are fighting. That is obvious. But, then it effects the families and the economy and the morale and the country overall.

Let us just look at things for a minute. Who benefits from twenty years of war? Was it the soldiers? No. Was it the families? No. Was it society? No. So I ask again, who benefits from the twenty years of war in Afghanistan? Was it freedom? No, we have less than ever. Was it the Afghans/Iraqis? No, they are right back where they started.

Remember when I talked about right for the wrong reasons? Here we are. This is not hindsight. It was less than four years ago that the US withdrew from Afghanistan and the writing was on the wall years before that. Sun Tzu wants spies to shorten war. For some reason, others do not want the war to end.

Who might that be? If it is not good for the people or society then who could possibly want it to continue? The only answer is the people that profit from war. That would be first and foremost the military industrial complex enabled and sustained by politicians. Such an insidious relationship where they wrap themselves in an American flag. They are there for the soldier and freedom.

The politicians use their Newspeak to point fingers at the other political side and the fictitious enemy. You know that it cannot be true when all the news stories cover children following soldiers around asking for candy and the people are so warm and welcoming. The perception given is that people are liberated and happy when inexplicitly the war continues.

There is certainly a time to fight. The very best reason is when you are invaded and you definitely don’t want it. So Poland in 1939 is a pretty good reason. Sometimes getting provoked is a pretty good reason. But like I was taught in Sunday school, do unto others that you would have done onto you. Or how about grade school? Two wrongs don’t make a right.

What amazes me is the approval rating of congress has been perennially less than 30%. And yet the re-election rate of incumbents is over 80% for all positions (house and senate). So let us say that I disapprove of the job the senate has done but yet I have sent my same senator for six straight terms. Is it always someone else’s fault? Logic would have to say no. Maybe, just maybe I shouldn’t keep re-electing the problem.

Unfortunately, when military actions are taken without a declaration of war, the system is broken. And when the system is broken, nothing can be trusted. You cant actually expect someone to change a system when all involved ignore the rules.

I am not going argue that intelligence is key to making the best decisions. It is really hard to say that Sun Tzu includes that vast topic under the umbrella of spies or not. It doesn’t really seem written that way. So again, if we stay myopically under spies, I cant think of relevance in the civilian world.

End Your Programming Routine: I should talk that that I am advocating for power to the people. I don’t even believe that we can vote our way out of this. At the same time, I cannot agree with Sun Tzu more that war is costly. It is why it should not be entered lightly and should end as quickly as possible. We absolutely get caught up in taking sides on a conflict where we are always the losers.

This is chapter twelve and after today, one more to go. If you wanted to learn how to attack with fire, today is your day. This chapter is all about when and how to do so. Once again, good leaders will use this tactic prudently and appropriately.

To tell you the truth, I cannot think of anything relevant about the philosophy of attacking with fire outside of a military realm. I remember in the early 1990s the movie Backdraft when sometimes fighting a fire requires setting another fire to deplete the oxygen out of the main fire. So, I guess there is a counter tactic to using fire as a weapon. But that is not what this chapter is about.

If we look at fire as a weapon and its effective use requires specific tactics then maybe we can look at things in a different light. Said more generally, use certain techniques to get the results you want with a particular tool or weapon. OK, what does that really mean.

I remember that as a kid, I used to love to go to the used bookstore. It was one of the few places that my mom would let us spend money and sometimes she would pay for books too. Sometimes I would go to the military non-fiction section. I was looking for encyclopedia like references of equipment and other things to dream about being deadly awesome.

I remember one time I found the Army Survival Guide. I read that thing cover to cover. I learned that I could take a parachute and make a shelter as well as weave twigs together to make a fish trap. There was lots of information about snares and traps included.

Around the same time, I was taking the Wilderness Survival merit badge in Boy Scouts. I built a survival kit and spent the night in a shelter that I built in the woods. I thought that I knew a whole lot about wilderness survival. But, the truth is I had a lot of resources for a short duration (overnight) and a lot of useless knowledge.

The army survival guide was helpful from a stimulant standpoint. But, lets be honest I wont have a parachute with me. This was long before shows like Dual Survival came along. Have you seen how effective their traps and snares are? These are essentially professional survivalists barely surviving. Clearly, man evolved from living entirely off of the land so I know that it is possible but there is a huge disconnect from that civilization to ours.

My whole point of this is that it is helpful to have a reference as a starting point. That is The Art of War or FM 21-76 Army Survival Guide. But practice and living it are the only way to become proficient. We can read all we want about the best fire to beat our enemies but it oversimplifies things tremendously. Good luck starting a fire outside today in my neck of the woods, we have the bomb cyclone going on.

End Your Programming Routine: Each week I am trying to find a way to say the same thing over and over again. The right tactics used properly will yield better results. As I stated in the beginning, I honestly don’t know what the value of this chapter is. I could think of some things that I want to burn down, but that is not really appropriate. Why don’t we leave it at that.

Another chapter on terrain. This leaves us with two more reading chapters until we are done with this book. I will wrap it up with one more opinion on the whole book and then moving on to something else. I am thinking that I might give book reviews a rest until the new year since we are so close to the end of the year. Don’t worry I will announce what it is to give you a chance to start.

The thing that makes this different the last chapter is that this one talks about the tactics on the different types of terrain. I am not going to rehash the types and responses, you can read that for yourselves. But the general idea is the deeper the army goes into enemy territory the different name it has. As a result, the different strategy and tactics to put to use.

I have to say that I am struggling with relating this outside of war again. I mean, I suppose that you can change tactics on any campaign when the situation dictates it. There is a time in a business when even though things seem like they are going well, trouble is just around the corner despite things look rosy right now.

There was a time that I was working at a small company. The company was making money hand over fist. We, the workers were killing ourselves working 80 hour work weeks. I am not begrudging the owners by any means, this is a story about tactics. The company scored a huge job and they pulled out all the stops to make it worth the effort.

But, something was not quite right underneath. Even though the owners were buying boats and vacation homes, deep down they were worried that this couldn’t be repeated or sustained. It was part that they had gotten what they wanted from the business, but they also knew that there were responsible for thirty some mouths now. So we ended up merging with a larger company.

The point is that things never looked better from a financial standpoint but a change of tactics was called for. I will never know if that was the right decision but I think this falls right into Sun Tzu’s advice. We need to keep our eyes open in all situations despite what it seems like.

There is more jibber jabber about leaders and treating the group as one. If the group is one then they will work with predictive results and in a more cohesive fashion. I say it in that tone because I think we have had some of this beat in chapter after chapter. There is nothing like repetition to emphasize the point.

End Your Programming Routine: If I was going to summarize this chapter, I would have to say that tactics are situational. Do different things depending on the situation for the best chance for success. I can’t say that is a revolutionary idea, it seems like a common sense one. The real trick is knowing accurately what part of the situation you are actually in.

I am trying to keep it short today. This is partially because I don’t have a whole lot to add, but also because while I think that this is solid advice, it is not universally true. You will see why as you read on.

This is one of those chapters that while might be good advice and good tactics, is probably outdated. The first part of the chapter is about the different types of terrain.

• Accessible – equal advantage either side, take the high ground
• Entangling – can move forward but not back
• Deadlock – no advantage either side
• Enclosed – can move back but not forward
• Precipitous – take the high ground

The reason that I believe that this is out of date advice is that when we look at modern warfare, it is way more complicated. Adhering to this advice strictly, there would have never been invasions of the Pacific Islands during WWII. Modern weapons such as airplanes have drastically changed the strategy for assaults.

With Veteran’s Day coming up, my most familiar conventional war was World War II. I think about those ‘kids’ putting out temporary bridges for the invading force to use. I heard a story about US Seabees bulldozing a landing strip while being shot at. I think by Sun Tzu’s definition, these were probably bad tactics.

On the other hand, the US could have used some Sun Tzu wisdom in Vietnam. I think that we thought based on what we did in WWII that we could bulldoze our way through that war. Certainly, we didn’t heed the advice to get out of the swamp as soon as possible. Bombers, artillery, gunships etc could not clear out the jungle. We haven’t got to or I don’t know if Sun Tzu addresses the will of the opposition.

I want to relate this to the election badly or at least something not military related, but it is hard. I suppose if we say the terrain is something like the economy then you might say stepping into the battlefield with weapons like it is ‘your fault’ and you ‘just don’t get it’ were inadequate. The democrats stayed way too long in terrain that was not advantageous.

Even stalwart supporters like minority groups thumbed their noses at Democrats. This is now in the territory of moving forward without the ability to move back. I have no idea why the party of Lincoln ultimately got the no questions asked approval of the party of slavery in the 20th century. The Democrats were the party of segregation in the 1960s. And yet they didn’t blink an eye to support the Democrats.

A short diatribe. When my wife and I moved to South Carolina in 2001, my wife’s aunt was disturbed. She said ‘how could you move to a state that Strum Thurmond was a Senator’? Strom was a famous racist Democrat in the 1960s and my wife’s aunt was the Democrat that I spoke of in my podcast Monday. How those two could be in the same party is beyond me but Strom was now a Republican for twenty years.

I don’t care what party is after your name people are who people are. That being said, those people an change. I am not going to give them a current inch but when you start moving in the right direction, it is tie to let the past be the past. I think Trump started with advantage to move forward, but not back. It turns out that was the result of the election.

End Your Programming Routine: I had to try to find some relevance outside of military tactics because I don’t find this chapter super relevant. As such, I had to make some stretching to try and make this pertinent. While I don’t trust either side, clearly the tactic to denigrate the common man failed, this time. Don’t be surprised if either party brings it back. I am just happy that the group that was perpetrating it got it shoved in their face. That is picking a battle in the wrong terrain.

There is no mystery here, the title of the chapter is actually what it is about. Some translations call it Army on the March or something of the like. At least in my translation, I would say that it is a little more than marching but what to do on the encountered terrain is included. At least this chapter is not a complete mystery.

Once again, I would say that the advice is pretty common sense (at least I thing so). It is such things like, if you are in swamp do whatever you can to get out of the swamp or try to pick the higher ground for encampment. It also offers some intuitive advice like if you end up fighting in a swamp, move to end it quickly or get out of the swamp. Or in other words ‘don’t get bogged down’ do what you can to stay in strategic advantage.

There is also some tactical tips in this chapter. Some examples include frothy stream water means that it is raining upstream. Certain dust cloud formations indicate chariot direction and army composition. I would say that this kind of advice is not terribly practical at this point in history. We don’t have too many chariot armies to deal with. It is possible that tanks make different clouds than trucks, I just don’t know. Reading Sun Tzu, I can only comment on what is written.

It doesn’t mean that this line of thinking is totally devoid of value, we just have sift through the non-applicable to the applicable. For instance when I am in the woods, it is often the case that when we humans (me) blunder into the area, animals are disturbed. As long as you sit very still, things will start coming back to normal (before blundering in the woods). I take from it that humans interact with the environment. Knowing the impact of our interaction gives us a strategic advantage over those that do not.

Since playing army and tactics are not super relevant to most of us, there is probably something else that we can get out of this chapter. It reminds me of a saying that is common in self defense circles. ‘Don’t go to stupid places with stupid people and do stupid things’. What that means is that if we knew the future, smart people would not get into trouble.

Said another way, if you knew that going to a certain location was going to get you mugged, a smart person wouldn’t go. We can have all the bravado about concealed carry and BS but wouldn’t it just be better to not be there in the first place? I think so. So, if you are getting the sense that a situation might be trouble, this is your first indication to avoid it. Speaking of which, I would avoid downtown of major cities just after the election Tuesday night.

Using an example from the recent news, Kyle Whittingham. He went to a riot with a rifle under the auspices of protecting a friend’s property. Stuff went sideways and fortunately for him, he got out unharmed physically. But, it sure doesn’t mean that he didn’t have consequences. After having to stand trial and being exonerated, he is now somewhat of a social pariah. When you have to stand and fight, I get it. But that is going to stupid places. I suspect that he wishes he would have just stayed home.

What I think Sun Tzu is saying is that he willingly went into the swamp. Then a fight started. Whittingham fortunately followed Sun Tzu’s advice and got out of the swamp quickly, hence he is still with us. March through the swamp as fast as possible, if absolutely necessary.

End Your Programming Routine: I have to say that it is refreshing to not have to read a lot of other’s interpretations to understand what is the point of the chapter. That is giving me flashbacks to Dante. It is just that I am not versed in eastern philosophy so I don’t recognize what is happening even when it is hitting me in the face. Machismo of the past might call my advice cowardly. But, you never know who is bringing a gun to a fist fight. There is a pretty good chance that I will.

As luck would have it this week, I was listening to a podcast called The Essential Framework to Understanding the Art of War. After listening to it, then reading the transcripts I am sure that I didn’t get a lot out of it. I would say that there are two sort of contradictory things. One is that you cant just read a little bit and get the whole concept. On the other hand, while reading pick one thing that resonates and pursue it (kind of what I tend to do).

To begin to understand it, we really need to have a grasp of the Chinese philosophy and its foundations (see Chapter One). Really though, I should be talking about Chapter eight, not some podcast. I just thought that maybe this tip might be helpful if you are struggling through this like I am.

I feel like it is a little disingenuous to take a two page chapter and copy a two lists out of it, so I wont. But, I do have to talk about them. The first list is the nine items that a leader must act upon (or potentially change). This is the namesake of the chapter. The second list are five items that can cause a leader to fail. It could also be construed as weaknesses or vulnerabilities of a leader.

An excerpt from list one

1. There are roads that are not followed
2. There are armies that are not attacked
3. There are fortified cities that are not assaulted
4. There are commands from the ruler that are not accepted.

You would think that as book smart as the US military is, they would have read and studied Sun Tzu. That being said, the first problem is accepting all commands from the ruler. As a result, they will go down any road, attack any army and siege any fortress.

I wholeheartedly believe that the US military is the best trained, the best equipped and willing to do anything. We can subjugate any population as long as we are actively involved. The problem being is that I don’t believe that our moral values permit this type of ‘victory’. We want to go in, kick butt and then have them thank us for the pleasure.

Obviously, you can tell from my tone that there is more to this than what I am saying. I agree with Sun Tzu that some wars are not winnable. This is the very reason that Israel is going to spend all this blood and treasure to be in the same position when it is finally over that it is when it starts. I am not being over dramatic about my hope that this battle will be over and the world is still intact.

Vietnam, the Middle East, Afghanistan these are all unwinnable because when the people don’t want intervention, it is futile. We just cant seem to understand that. I completely get the desire for vengeance for 9/11 but twenty years of war for what? The official statistics are 2448 US casualties from 2001 to 2021 to their 243,000. But, what the conflict did to the ones that came home. I personally have observed more than one veteran that took their own lives as a result. I kind of think this is a nod to Sun Tzu and his teachings. Some battles should not be fought.

End Your Programming Routine: I am not a pacifist nor am I a conscientious objector. I am fully in agreement with defending life, liberty and property. This is where I differ philosophically from our current view of freedom. You don’t find threats to that in Afghanistan or Vietnam. All you really find is a war machine, death and destruction of both guilty and innocent parties. Don’t we believe in letting ten guilty people go at the expense of convicting one innocent person?

This is week eight of the reading of the Art of War. I have to admit that this book is so short that I have read ahead a bunch and then forgot anything that I read. I then have to go back and re-read the chapter so that I have any semblance of something to write about. Fortunately at only two pages, I can even reread a couple of times a night.

I hate to admit this but I can reread these chapters and not get that much from it. I have already talked in the past weeks about Yin and Yang and eastern philosophy and this week is really no different. Most of what each one of these points are contains a strong undercurrent of Yin and Yang.

The following are the major points in this chapter.

• Make the best of a bad opportunity
• Balance the drive to attack with the fatigue of battle
• The mind and mindset is as important as the physical in battle
• Do not over extend your forces in exuberance

Once again, there is also a strong implication on the importance of leadership. Realize that this chapter opens up with the general getting orders from the ruler. That means that the general has a degree of latitude to operate but the objective is set.

I was listening to an interview this week with the daughter of Steven Covey (author of “Seven Habits of Highly Effective People”). After that, my mind wandered how these popular thought leaders were influenced or directed to their ideas. It kind of strikes me that many ‘celebrity’ authors were highly motivated by people that I have never heard from or about.

This then me to think about who we consider ‘leaders’ today. I am primarily speaking about politicians now. They are nothing like Sun Tsu or Steven Covey. By that I mean there is no Yin and Yang and very little wisdom that come from our politicians. I have to categorically say that is because politicians are not actually leaders. I think that they are more aptly named actors or maybe control freaks.

We want to believe that there is self reflection and accountability but being a not-leader shouldn’t surprise us that there is not. If you are not a leader you don’t have to do those things to get re-elected. Leaders move a group of people from one position to another. This could be physical or ethereal.

In my observation, leaders are people that apply or document good advice and tactics regardless of the source. The reason that I know people are influenced by people I have never heard of is that Covey credits these people in his work. Unless an actor is receiving an award, how often are they crediting others for the influence or beliefs? Based on what I have seen, never.

Our ‘leaders’ are sending troops to the middle east as I write. Can someone please explain to me why this is in the best interest of the United States of America? I can no longer buy into the 1960s domino theory anymore. If I had to speculate, it is that unnamed individuals are influencing foreign policy for personal or financial gain. Politicians use mask of freedom to start another war. Are you enjoying the show?

End Your Programming Routine: It is the generals who will be tasked with operating within Sun Tsu’s guidelines in the middle east. Our leaders are actually the rulers, get that paradigm straight. If we did a better job of adequately overlaying descriptions should wake us up to what is actually happening. Unfortunately, I don’t think we are going to vote our way out of this. But, I do think that we have a better chance of doing less harm and getting what we want when we are aware of the actors versus the leaders.

Technically, this is week seven in the review of this book and it would be considered chapter six. Translation variation makes it a little difficult to search by the title of the chapter. So, it is more fruitful to search for ‘Chapter Six’ rather than ‘Vacuity and Substance’. That is a tip that I have learned throughout this process if you want to do more supplemental research.

If you are a fan of Yin/Yang then you will love this chapter. Pretty much all of the points discussed contain this sort of context. In general terms the concepts are strong versus weak, first versus second, win versus lose, whole versus divided, offensive versus defensive, you get the point.

Maybe this chapter would be more insightful if we put ourselves back 2500 years ago? A lot of what was discussed seemed fairly common knowledge today when it comes to tactics. For instance, going on offense causes the opponent to devote resources to defense. When you are focused on defense, then it is not possible to execute your own offensive strategy. Hence, it is better to be on the offense rather than the defense.

An army that can split the opponents has a strength advantage. This is because it is easier to execute power when it is concentrated. This is a pretty common realization in business. When you try to do too many things, you may dilute efforts to the very most important efforts.

The most important concept I zeroed in on this chapter was at the end. To paraphrase, it basically says that there are no guarantees in victory. Or said another way, unpredictable things can always happen. By proxy, the best plans should be somewhat fluid or able to adapt if and or when the terrain is different than planned.

I think a very good example is the tragedy with Hurricane Helene. Some people left Florida to avoid the hurricane. On the surface, it seems like a very smart idea. However, spending the week in Ashville turned out to be a fatal error. As someone that lived hundreds of miles from the South Carolina coast, I would not have figured that to be a risk. But as Sun Tzu points out, things that you cant control sometimes happen.

Ninety nine times out of 100, going to Ashville would be a win win. Escape danger and have a nice vacation. This just happened to be the unforeseeable scenario. What if I have spent my whole life saving for retirement and I get killed in a car accident at 65? Would that have been a waste? I would say that there are some times that you just cannot plan for and those are the things that you cannot worry about.

However, if you are planning your whole working for life to retire and you lose your job at 63, that is a plan that needs to have some overlay flexibility. People that take reasonable risk mitigation into account in their plans are the smart ‘generals’. I honestly didn’t think that Tzu was encouraging planning for the car wreck but it is always illustrative to go to the extreme to drive the point home.

End Your Programming Routine: It is hard for me to say that Sun Tzu has caused this philosophy to be common place or that he was simply the first to document the obvious. Regardless, it is probably good to refresh on the fundamentals because it is really common for organizations to get lost in the tress. Sometimes it happens when you just try to do one more thing and pretty soon you are doing ten mediocre tasks rather that one strong one. For that reason, it is helpful to stand back and check yourself once and a while. That is a better strategy for flexibility and flexibility is the key to more victories.

I read a bunch of these chapters in a row when my son was at a doctor’s appointment. A few weeks later I re-read this chapter again and last night I re-read it again. This particular chapter is more abstract then the ones I have reviewed thus far. Truth be told, I didn’t get much out of it by reading multiple times. I was hoping that if I kept banging my head and then letting it rattle around for a while it would come to me.

As a result, I went to the internet to get a hint. It is like those 3D pictures that you stare and stare until you see it. I guess that I would say that I see it, but it is not direct. This chapter is about leadership and it uses some very some very aloof analogies to make the point.

Part of the reason that it is so abstract is because this chapter is riddled with eastern philosophy. I am no expert in that, in fact I can barely recognize it. The two strongest ones were Yin and Yang (I recognized that one) and the order of fives. I had no idea that the Chinese thought that there were five notes, five colors and five flavors (that seems familiar). While I am familiar about some of those ideas, mastering the practice is a life long endeavor.

With that in mind, I am not sure exactly how the technique of go hard/go soft is actually a successful military tactic. I suppose that I could take it as far as tactics are situational. That seems intuitive at least. But, since this chapter is about leadership, I have heard it say that the best leaders know how to motivate people by a mixture of toughness and softness. I won’t say it is common sense because I have come across a lot of bad leaders but at least it feels right.

Without reading the cliff notes, I picked the last section as what I thought was the most impactful section of this chapter. The text talks about logs and rocks as sort of moving as a result of natural consequences. It is the leader that positions the logs and rocks to roll down the hill and stay stationary on a flat surface. Or said another way, the leader is the one to own the battle’s win or loss results. That is something I can get behind.

Many times I think that leaders get too much credit without enough blame. Let us think about the President for a moment. Whether we will have one or the other as president, it generally won’t change the temperature in my pool so to speak. When the economy was on fire in the late 1990s, Clinton didn’t do that. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time. W Bush didn’t cause the financial crisis of 2008, he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Now, he didn’t do himself any favors by continuing to support money printing under the federal reserve. He also got lucky that financial takeovers stopped the economy from totally failing. But to actions that he did personally as president had little to do with the overall outcome. What I am trying say is that leaders enable the conditions for success or failure. Depending on whether they guess right or not has potential outcomes.

You can bet that if we see a President Harris, that administration will be open to communing with socialists. You can also bet that if we see a President Trump, that administration will be open with Oligarchs. Both will be dreaming about a Fascist future. Because that is our destiny, it will likely be so. Tell me, what would I credit either with? Certainly not a better future based on American ideals. But they won’t do it by themselves, the constituents, the appointees and the people working the system will be the ones doing the work. Only the accountability goes to the leader.

End Your Programming Routine: In the end, I agree that leaders should be accountable. I also agree that there are many things that can be done to influence the results. But ultimately, leaders design the boat, they don’t make it sail. If their design for a sail boat contains no sail, then obviously that is going to fail. Putting the proper boat in the water isn’t going to guarantee that it sails either. There are factors like having wind that we just cannot control.