I forget where, but the greatest review of the Art of War I've seen was "People make fun of Sun Tzu for saying what should be obvious, but you have to realize that he's writing a war manual for a ruling class that has never seen mud".
My favorite is someone summarizing it as: "It's absolute genius level 4D chess when you're the kind of clueless commander who has to be reminded that your troops do, in fact, need food to not starve."
That's an unfair description. What you may call obvious, I call axiomatic: a truth so fundamentally unassailable that it can't be argued, only built upon. Euclid's "The Elements" was based on incredibly "obvious" axioms, too, and it became the basis for all math and geometry for the next several millennia.
Seriously, the level of disconnect between the ruling class and their people was so bonkers it's a wonder the whole concept of dynastic China didn't implode way before the Han came into the picture.
Well, he put it differently as he focussed more on grand strategy but I can definitely find it: "Therefore, a skilled commander seeks victory from the situation and does not demand it of his subordinates." It works if you consider your weapons your "subordinates". So you use the loaded sidearm you have, instead of lamenting the reload time of your main weapon (the reinforcement that are not here yet). There are also multiple appeals to being decisive and showing intiative.
@@christopherg2347 Hell, treating your weapons like your subordinates is also something that he would agree with. If you properly take care of your weapons like you take care of your soldiers, then the chances of them failing and breaking in battle are lessened dramatically.
The Art of War was had such an effect that now everything in the book seems obvious. At the time advice like "don't pick a fight if you think you will lose" was actually useful
In addition, we scoff at stating the obvious, but most colossal failures occur because people neglected the basics of their craft. Actually knowing, understanding and applying the basics of what you're doing is extremely valuable.
You'd think so, but an obvious concept to one person may not be seen as such as another, especially when it comes to history and war (for example, it doesn't matter how brilliant your tactician or general is, if the majority of your soldiers are starving to death because of terrible economic policy)
to be fair, much of what he said was also obvious to the people of the time. But he wasn't writing to them, he was writing to nepo babies obsessed with poetry. Forget a fight, these people had barely seen dirt. If I was writing for a more eloquent 15-year-old Elon Musk, I'd also keep insisting on "Thinking before acting" and "If you don't bring food your people will die and you will lose"
"If you wish to walk, you must first stand up straight. Once you are on your feet, you must place one foot in front of the other. Only then can you attain motion." Obvious to anyone over the age of 2, except if you've been riding in palanquins for 20 years because you're so allegedly superior to the rest of the human race.
"Dont show your strategies in a TH-cam Video - you fool, you absolute Idiot" - Sun Tzu (He will always be connected to Technoblade for me, couldnt help myself)
Technoblade is why I actually even read some of the Art of War, I wanted to better understand when the actual references ended and Techno’s original comedy began
The other historical context that one should consider with the Art of War was that Sun Tzu (or whoever wrote it) intended it not only as instructions to new generals, but also to monarchs who HIRED generals to lead their armies, with guidelines such as "don't hamper your military commanders if they're doing something right" or "consider how vital logistics are", clearly intended to rulers who might not understand the complexities of extended warfare from the comfort of their palaces. As such, the book can be read with a serious "As Per my last E-mail" vibe.
@@louistannudin2486 A passive-aggressive expression of exasperation at advice previously given, but not followed. A general sense of "This is the second time I’m telling you this. I don’t want to have to tell you again. Stop ignoring me!" couched in language that won't aggravate a thin-skinned authority
@louistannudin2486 office work reference. Basically a passive-aggressive way of going "I TOLD you about this problem a week ago, and you didn't do jack, don't come crying to me about it now."
On of the best example of that is found in chapter 3 : "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army: - By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army. - By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds. - By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers." This right here screams "Rulers, stop trying to manage the army!"
@@louistannudin2486 E-mails are very long text messages and can contain additional files, such as pictures or additional documents in text or PDF formats, in the form of attachments. E-mail usually requires access to a server (but not necessarily the internet) to send or receive and are generally considered a secure and reliable form of communication. In the early proto-internet an appropriately configured computer could be addressed and directly and receive e-mails as a stand-alone server. E-mail can also generally be accessed over slow connections and with low capacity devices unlike many current communication formats. (If you've read this far this is meant to be dry sarcasm.)
"There are not more than five cardinal tastes (sour, acrid, salt, sweet, bitter), yet combinations of them yield more flavors than can ever be tasted." - Sun Tzu, "The Art of War" (This is an actual quote from Chapter 5.)
Parallels the five elements, directions ( inward is counted ), the smells, main organs of the body, musical notes ( pentatonic scale used by China ), and many more. It's important not to act on a quotation from this book: learn and use it all at once, and all the time, basically.
“You may think that the book you just read is about war, but really it’s for MBAs and executives, as a guide to create the most toxic work environment imaginable.” - Sun Tzu
The book explicitly calls out to treat your subordinates firmly but fairly: Book 9, lines 42-44: If soldiers are punished before they have grown attached to you, they will not prove submissive; and, unless submissive, then will be practically useless. If, when the soldiers have become attached to you, punishments are not enforced, they will still be unless. *Therefore soldiers must be treated in the first instance with humanity,* but kept under control by means of iron discipline. This is a certain road to victory. If in training soldiers commands are habitually enforced, the army will be well-disciplined; if not, its discipline will be bad.
Been a fan of this book since my teens. If someone wants to buy it, make sure you get a version that includes annotations by later chinese military strategists (which also might be forged or fictional btw). Context, commentary, explanations and funny little anecdotes. Like the one about a commander of a besieged city who sealed up a jar of piss, made up to look like fancy wine, and sent it to the opposing commander as a gift: in order to provoke him into an insanely costly all-out attack. "General so-and-so became enraged and ordered his troops to swarm up the walls like ants." Followed by further comment: "The calamity of these assaults is such that even if they succeed a commander might lose nine tenths of his troops." I also feel that despite how much the book endorses cold ruthlessness and deceit, it has undercurrents of humanity. The author is telling you that if suck at this stuff, your soldiers will die, your country will be empoverished, your people will starve, and possibly you will be conquered and subjugated by hostile neighbors. I'm a Swede. The worst king we ever had (Charles XII) was a brilliant battlefield tactician and a personal badass, who followed every victory with another campaign, another war. When he finally died, our country was sucked dry, partly depopulated, broke and indebted up to our ears, and we had a bunch of neighbors that hated our guts, including Russia. That moron could have used a little Sun Tzu in his reading diet. Thanks for another great episode, Cheers!
He's actually kinda like Machiavelli, the brutal pragmatism and cold strategy is there because overall it is less costly and results in less suffering for the people being led. Even if the leader doesn't care about their people, since the writings makes sense and works then the leader reading it is more likely to follow the advice/teachings, which is better for their people than the alternative.
@@gunnarschlichting9886 Absolutely. Another book I was really into in my teens btw. Anyway, Blue has already made a really god video on old Niccolo, so I don't want to go into it too long here. I'm not the first person to find it hard to nail down the true authorial intent of The Prince. Is it satire? Is he saying "If I must have an authoritarian, can I at least get a competent one!"? Or is he sincerely licking the buttcrack of the guy in the dedication because he really want a new job? All of the above? But I do think it's clear, from his other writings, that he thought that a republic was a superior system to a dictatorship.
@@ace_verco Sorry, no. I've seen a lot of thin paperbacks in the "Management and Business" sections of bookstores without. But you'll just have to open it up and see if the numbered statements from Sun Tzu are standalone, or if they're interspersed with cursive comments starting with the name of the commentator. They have names like Li Ch'üan, Tu Mu, Chang Yü and Ts'ao Ts'ao. As I understand it, some of these guys are historical figures, but that doesn't mean the comments are provably theirs. My latest copy is The new illustrated edition, translated by Samuel B. Griffith, Watkins Publishing. Good luck.
Emphatically seconded. My personal favorite is a pair of stories: 1) commander leaves a note on a tree in a valley he knows the enemy will pass through that night. Only the officers know how to read, so when a torch lights up, he knows exactly where the enemy leadership is...and that's the signal for the archers to let loose on that location. 2) same guy finally gets pinned down, hopelessly outnumbered in a fort that can't hold off what's against him. He has them open the gates, and sits down playing music like there isn't an enemy army in front of him. The enemy commander decides "he's probably bluffing but I'm not gonna risk it, after last time" and goes home 😂 Some real gems in those commentaries, plus useful notes on historical context, measurement equivalents, etc.
I have read a few chapters at least. While his wisdoms do seem like no-brainers they are flanked by comtemplation that provides context for the quotes, and as Blue stated they make perfect sense for a Daoist vision on harmony and effortless action. The style is not working well for a modern audience, because the way the text is written, it feels more like individual quotes, even if the chapters basically need to be read as a whole. Combine that with the fact that, from the Zhou dynasty onwards, China never had a primary martial class like samurai, knights or similar warriors, and most of their warriors were courtiers who were not good enough to get to the top of the bureaucratic ladder, and the text makes much more sense as a general introduction to how a Daoist military leader or warlord should approach warfare: by ensuring that war is the last resort, and by making sure that if war breaks out, you have so much advantage that the war is a foregone conclusion. Which, given how modern military campaigns are playing out, is not even that stupid of a lesson, apparently.
I always liked the interpretation that the author(s?) of the Art of War were writing for the most boneheaded nobles who slept through military school on the strength of their family names and could not stay focused on anything longer than the meme explanation of basic strategy.
I guess? The problem being a general in those times was that there was no military school. The only way to learn was through experience, which is notably dangerous. Having a manual explaining fundamental concepts and the mindset to best implement them was groundbreaking.
Generalship even in the most organised states back then was experienced based. With commanders learning from an older teacher and maybe a book like this for reference.
@@LuperisNone I mean, not necessarily. Remember, these people would be firmly aware of Daoist principles. If you want to teach someone something, a good way is to put it in a way that they already understand. Need to teach a newly appointed general who spent his childhood as a noble's son? Explain grand strategy through the lens of concepts found in the philosophy you learned.
As an owner of a translated copy, it's a surprisingly slim and concise treatise. I feel reading it back to back with the Prince does something to one's brain however. So I did a chaser of Crime and Punishment.
Funnily enough I did similarly on a 12 hour flight once. Read the Art of War, followed by The Prince. Then on the, shorter, flight home read Siddhartha. Was a very strange but delightful time.
@@joendeo1890You have extremely fine taste. My favourite reading is when two books have a tenuous link on the surface but get more connected over time. The best/worst double bill I ever did was Tess of the d'Urbervilles followed by Notre-Dame de Paris. I don't know what emo shiz I was on but *mistake*!!!
@@Firegen1 I recommend Une si Longue Lettre (So Long a Letter) By Miriama Bâ and Une Vie de Boy (House Boy) By Ferdinand Oyo as a double whammy as they both cover elements of Colonial and Post-Colonial French West Africa.
@@joendeo1890I standby my first statement *adds to book list* Appreciate you! I am definitely up for that. I'm way behind on my Alys Fowler at the moment and my friend's brilliant book on adult autism. Will catch up
So, I was assigned this book as part of my martial arts training. I've read it multiple times since and I remember being blown away by just how much of the book is basically "war and fighting are foolish. Maybe don't do that."
Yeah, I was also surprised when I got into martial arts two years back how modern martial artists have the growing mentality of "the best way to win a fight is to avoid it, but if you can’t then knowing how to fight goes a long way". I guess the more you learn about fighting, the more you realise that there’s rarely a real winner in a serious fight instead of only different degrees of loser.
I feel like a lot of the wisdom in "The Art of War" is illustrative of the differences between fictional conflict and reality. An army is at its strongest before it fights a battle and weakest immediately after, regardless of whether they won or lost, but a hero is at their apex directly after a victory. The logic of heroic warriors is much more intuitive to the human mind, and that means when anyone is put in charge of an army, it will feel like a waste if they don't actually do some fighting. That's why Sun Tzu devotes so much energy to explaining how you can accomplish much more by making it clear that you WOULD win a fight, instead of actually fighting.
Had a history of warfare class in college that was really fun. The Art of War was one of the textbooks, and one assignment was to pick a battle, and analyze it using the book. I chose one of the battles of Acre during the crusades, as I was also reading a history of the Knights Templar at the time("Dungeon, Fire, and Sword," if anyone is interested). Ended up being quite the laundry list of how the attacking crusaders screwed up... Like... my dudes, a handful of you get through a city wall, and you have most of your guys STOP OTHERS FROM ENTERING so you can win more glory. Not making this up...
Look up Lions led by Donkeys. As much as people meme about the Art of War being ‘obvious’…uh…people in militaries have always been very dumb. The Crusaders especially were a collection of complete idiots who multiple times got themselves trapped and slaughtered because they decided “who needs this thing called ‘water?’ Our troops survive on faith! Hey why is everyone dying of heat stroke?”
@@tenkiforecastMilitary men are rarely dumb. Or blind. But ignorant of how or why to win battles, oh yes. So very much. - and for most of history, officers came from the ruling classes, who had other people to do everything for them, which means utterly ignorant leaders, killing competent soldiers.
@@stevetheduck1425 "officers came from the ruling classes, who had other people to do everything for them, which means utterly ignorant leaders" Unless - Wait for it! - You're the Mongols. Seriously though, much of The Art of War sounds like it would be obvious to anyone with a brain, but you have to remember how many military leaders throughout history have been dumb as posts.
An exercise I'd find fascinating is critiquing campaigns and generals regarded as highly successful through Sun Tzu's thought. There's a book about applying old military thought to history by Bevin Alexander that I want to give a try, hopefully it will have some of that.
From what I've read, by the time of the end of the Han dynasty, the Art of War was actually falling into obscurity as a military text; for something so straightforward, it was apparently considered somewhat impenetrable and not particularly applicable. The general and statesman Cao Cao sort of rescued it from the dustbin of history, requiring his subordinates to read it while providing his own commentaries on it that helped recontextualize its lesson to be more understandable; I seem to recall reading somewhere that for a long time, his annotated version was thought to be the original, until a copy that predated him was found. Incidentally, I think Cao Cao would make for an interesting episode History-Makers, or at least merits a look; after all, how often can someone claim to be not just an incredibly capable general (arguably the best in his part of the world at the time), a talented and forward-thinking administrator, AND rank as one of the period's three foremost poets (the other two being his sons)?
AND on top of that get a reputation of ruthlessness that rivals that of Genghis Khan. But yes, Sun Tzu walked so Cao Cao could run, basically, because Cao Cao was a master in doing exactly what Sun Tzu advocated: ensuring that if a fight is to break out, all advantages are on your side. Resulting in moments like when he alledgedly invited his enemy and former friend Yuan Shao to discuss terms for his surrender right before the battle commenced, only to reveal that he only did it to win time so that not only his cavalry, which he had sent out to ride around to the rear of the enemy army, could arrive on time, but also that the sun now stood behind his troops, forcing his enemies to fight with the sun shining straight in their eyes! That is 100% the kind of thing Sun Tzu advices to do.
@@the_tactician9858Not many renowned poets can claim to have had tens of thousands of noncombatants buried alive with the justification that they were inhabitants of large swathes of recently occupied territory who could neither be fully trusted not to revolt, nor could they be properly provided for with the resources available at the time, no. Cao Cao was utterly brilliant in so many ways, a true polymath, and he also committed or ordered a number of completely monstrous acts; there's a reason he became such a staple villain in Chinese opera, and why the Chinese equivalent of the phrase "speak of the devil" refers to him. He's an utterly fascinating figure, by turns admirable and repugnant.
@@JasynSuin "He's an utterly fascinating figure, by turns admirable and repugnant." This is very well said, both your comments are, but that last part is going to stick with me.
"All warfare is based..." -Sun Tzu Which is ironically the opposite point of the book, which is "winning with as little effort and actual violence as possible."
On top of that, the first chapter, which entirely too many people skip over because it references stuff like chariot logistics that isn't directly applicable anymore, is basically just a couple dozen variations on "war sucks please don't".
Fun fact: Ironically, one of the most famous people to ever miss the point of the Art of War was a statesman who worked for Qin and was responsible for transforming it into a major military power through his reforms. Shang Yang, a statesman and Legalist, was very much in favor of war as a tool to keep the populace under control. Even though the Art of War stated that fighting a war should be a last resort. He wrote a lot of laws about how nobility and commoners should be punished all the same since a screw-up is a screw-up and that every punishment should be harsh as a deterrent for further screw ups. Those laws bit him in the ass, though. He got the death sentence.
As memory serves, it also collapsed the Qin dynasty; a commander knew they'd be severely punished for tardiness due to getting caught in bad weather, so he went pirate. Other commanders who went after him failed to capture him, and knowing the same fate awaited them...just joined up. This snowballed quickly. When you use your most powerful weapons immediately, you have nothing to escalate to, and when you tell your opponent that defeat means death, they will fight to the death rather than accept it lying down. Sun Tzu was extremely explicit about that, recommending leaving your opponent a small road of escape rather than putting their back against the wall. But that, of course, would require enough reading comprehension to understand that the lessons are applicable beyond the battlefield.
@@SparkSovereign Not a commander, Liu Bang was the equivalent of a small town sheriff who went outlaw with the group of prisoners he was transporting. He also founded the Han Dynasty.
@@SparkSovereign And that is Han propaganda, because recently unearthed Qin documents suggested the law at the time didn't subject those with slight failures to death sentence. Liu Bang didn't fail to deliver criminal and rebel in fear of excution. He saw an oppturnity to become a warlord and took it, but obviously that wouldn't sound nice for propaganda. You can't just tell people that the emporer used to be a sheriff who frees criminals to gain power, you say "His hand was forced, totally, trust me bro, also don't bother looking up Qin law because its all burnt already."
@@lolasdm6959 fascinating! Discrediting previous regimes to make yours look better is a time honored atrocity, but I imagine there at least had to be some serious public frustration with the Qin legal system for it to be a believable claim, even if the details were wildly exaggerated. If nothing else, I unfortunately have met people who believed the tale as described...and thought it was a shame such a legal system wasn't around any more🫠 I'll have to read up on the latest research at some point. Dunno when I'll have time, but if you've got a recommendation for something accessible online I'm all ears.
With lessons like "food and rest are important for an army", "don't stop your subordinates from doing shit right" and "don't fight if you'll loose" I wouldn't be surprised if you were right
@@agustinvenegas5238 I mean, jokes aside, that was _kinda_ the point. It *seems* obvious at face value... but, I mean, [broadly gestures everywhere]. Think about *all* the dense MFs you've met who totally miss the point on a daily basis. The people for whom the blatantly obvious either sails right over their head, or repeatedly smacks them in the face and they still don't seem to notice. That's what Taoism is all about: Step 1) Get out of your own way Step 2) _Stay_ out of your own way Can you _honestly_ say that most people can follow those two basic steps? Can you honestly say that *you* do on a regular basis? The Art of War was about the practical application of those principles. "The successful warrior finds victory first, and only _then_ enters battle. The warrior doomed to defeat enters battle first, and only then looks for a path to victory." But when it comes to actually putting it into _practice..._ would you? Could you? Or do you habitually leap before you look?
This honestly feels like half a quote from Art of War. Though it's actually from Fate/Stay Night, Shirou Emiya specifically. It's also missing so many layers of context. Like the second half of "That's the way things should be". In a setting where many people do not actually die when killed. Or just the whole it being a take on a Japanese Proverb. As a final bit of pedantic ; Die =/= Killed. Not only are they different tenses they have slightly different meanings and used cases.
What amazes me about The Art of War is not how basic it is, but how few people can truly grasp it. Part of this though is how much of it is easier said than done, like how few know what it means to know your self.
"Arrows hurt more than words, but words can leave deeper scars. Unless you take an arrow to the knee. Or the eye. Or the groin. Actually, arrows are pretty bad news, you should avoid them." -Sun Zu (pre-editor)
One benefit of having all your generals trained from the same text, even when isolated and out of contact with each other, they will still be able to anticipate each other's actions/responses to events and so act in ways to support each others efforts.
Napoleon, for example ( who may have read Sun Tzu in French translation ) won a battle by taking and then leaving a hill, while much of the battlefield was covered by mist.
A throne of skulls is a terrible idea. Skulls have little in the way of flat surfaces, in fact, the teeth are more likely to become a problem. Corpse thrones in general are inefficient as well, the conclusion Khorn is overly edgy, does not think about policy and a terrible tactician.
Honestly, I don't understand how anyone could read _The Art of War_ and NOT see it as a deeply philosophical text. That's WHY it has so many applications to life. It only has value and meaning when understood as a meditation and a thought process, not as an instructional manual. Consider, for example, a different translation of the "supreme excellence" quote: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. [...] Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." Note: *breaking the enemy's resistance.* Not defeating them. Not cowing them. Not shaming them. Breaking their resistance. But you know what else breaks an enemy's resistance? _Making them your allies._ And alliance achieves what warfare cannot: the complete and total preservation of infrastructure, expertise, and resources. Or another: "If I determine the enemy's disposition of forces while I have no perceptible form, I can concentrate my forces while the enemy is fragmented. The pinnacle of military deployment approaches the formless: if it is formless, then even the deepest spy cannot discern it nor the wise make plans against it." This presents the conundrum that the best successes are achieved through discipline and rigor, but discipline and rigor naturally present themselves as conformity, consistency, uniformity--as _patterns._ We must achieve a higher, greater pattern; we must achieve discipline so transcendent, it exceeds the bounds of nature itself, and becomes _new_ nature. But this carries over to every other part of life: not to destroy what is natural, but to elevate what is directed, intended, purposeful, until it becomes a new, complementary nature all its own. When discipline becomes instinctive, automatic, one might say _effortless,_ then the greatest mastery of all is achieved. This applies to any skill one can develop. _The Art of War_ is the specific application of philosophy to conflict. But _all of life_ can be understood as conflict; how terrible conflict can be, how much damage it can cause, and yet how difficult life can be if we reject ever facing it. That's what makes _The Art of War_ beautiful; it is, in a sense, a pacifist's guide to ending conflict as quickly, efficiently, and non-destructively as possible. Understood as a lens for viewing the difficulties of life, rather than as a bunch of dull platitudes, it presents a new way of viewing the world, one that may help break a person out of bad patterns (habits, relationships, coping mechanisms, family issues, etc., etc.) they've fallen prey to. It's not about everything--there is much to life that is not conflict, about which the book says nothing--but for the things it's made to examine, it is quite a feat.
1:21 "What next, if you're enemy's shooting arrows at you, consider not getting shot by them?" Ah yes, a callback to that time you kept trying to shoot people in the head, and they kept not getting shot in the head by you.
One of my favorite sayings about combat is also a "duhh", but also matters immensely: "The first rule of combat is: Don't get shot." "You laugh, but you'd be suprised how many people seem to FORGET this when the bullets are flying."
“If fighting is sure to result in victory then you must fight” Sun Tzu said that, and I think he knows a little more about fighting than you do pal because he invented it
I've been studying this text (as a layman nerd, not an academic) for a couple of decades, and I absolutely have to emphasise Blue's point about the value of the SunTzu as a Taoist text. Having read various translations (including business text commentaries and military historian takes), I must recommend the Denma Translation Group's gorgeous version. Some of the text translation can a little opaque to a 21st century round-eye, but their commentary opens up a world of understanding and is deeply aware of the Taoist philosophical underpinnings of it. That said, if this is your first time at Sun Tzu club, you might do better to start with Thomas Cleary - it's an easier read. The Denma might not be the best choice for Baby's First Art of War :) Anyway I think they're both still in print at Shambhala Press. P.S. I hope I'm not breaking the rules by doing something other than adding to the Edge and Snark in these here comments.
I love the concept behind, "do everything you can not to actually fight" cause it turns out armies are really expensive and throwing the around is a good way to break those toys. No army, no authority. Or as a wise youtube man once said "China is whole again, China is broke again."
In a multipolar conflict, throwing your army away in an attritional war against enemy A, even if you win, means you have nothing left to defend your other border against enemy B.
This classic text by Master Sun's (and make no mistake, he was a Jedi Master) was an excellent contribution to the Jedi Archives! They are now finally complete! But seriously, there is a lot in the Art or War and Daoism that align with Jedi Philosophy. Viewing everything in relation to a greater whole? That's literally how all aspects of life are connected to the Force. And as Jedi, our job is establish peace that but requires more than just talking. It requires political understanding, understanding of people, and understanding of warfare when the situation demands it. We are trained in all these facets of life becasue we must employ them depending one the situation. Effortless action is also very Jedi. Jedi do not want to intervene unless they have to. We use violence as a last resort and would rather people solve problems amongst themselves as those solutions come from the people and will be carried on by them after we are gone (Ex how Qui-Gon handled the Naboo conflict between the Naboo, Gungans, and Trade Federation). The highest excellence is to subdue an enemy without fighting at all? Luke himself "defeated" Vader and the Emperor by choosing not the fight and not kill Vader. The specific situation allowed for that highest excellence to be achieved, whereas less favorable situations, like the Rebels fighting to blow up the Death Star, are still allowed just accomplished with the aim of being as quick and efficient as possible. Like Daoists, Jedi are just as internal in their philosophy as they are external in their actions. They are expected to accomplish great things in the galaxy and establish peace but that's only possible if they can achieve internal harmony with the Force. To conquer the Dark Side in the world around them (war, suffering, treachery, oppression) they must first conquer the Dark Side within themselves (fear, anger, hate, arrogance). That's why Anakin and Luke both faced internal struggles as reflections of their external struggles.
Blue! Massive Applause. Admitting your wrong is easier than Correcting your mistakes, But you have a more powerful skill, Turning that correcting into a teaching moment for others. Love hearing your love and enthusiasm for the things you enjoy. Keep rocking the song of your life, It makes the lives of so many more better just to listen.
I always thought it was sadly fascinating how much emphasis Sun Tzu put into mercy and diplomacy in The Art of War. He makes clear that it's far better to avoid war if you can; to avoid battle if you can; to capture enemy troops, rather than kill them all; and to treat them mercifully, not just because he put a strong emphasis on humanity - though he certainly did - but as a matter of logistics. If your cause is just, and you treat your prisoners as human beings, you might even be able to convince a large part of them to join your side, willingly. At least, he advised this very action in Chapter 2, Waging War, in the second to last paragraph. He doesn't directly say "recruit captured soldiers", but he was just talking about reusing captured chariots, then advised treating captured soldiers well, and ended the paragraph by stating "[t]his is the tactic of using the defeated enemy to increase your strength." Although I thought I heard before that recruiting POWs is a war crime, and I'm just an occasional book reader, so maybe don't listen to me too well! Although it seems Sun Tzu is talking about voluntary recruitment of humanely-treated prisoners, without negative consequences for refusal, as opposed to less savory and voluntary press-ganging at gunpoint...
He was writing in the context of a multipolar conflict with constantly shifting alliances. If you are seen by everyone as too ruthless and bloodthirsty, then pretty soon everyone will be joining forces against you and you're hooped no matter how brilliant you are individually. And if you show mercy to a defeated enemy, after a few years of shifting diplomatic realities, that enemy might now become a needed ally.
I remember reading The Art of War when I was in middle school for fun. The only parts I kinda remember are his advice on what raiding stances to take depending on how thick into enemy territory you are in, how likely troops are to desert based on how close they are to the front lines, and him saying "if you are at a higher elevation from your enemy, flow down onto them like water" or something to that effect and talking about how an army should move fluidly and avoid moving up mountains and hills. Thought it was kinda cool stuff.
"This stuff is obvious!" -you "It is sometimes said, common sense is very rare." - Voltaire, Dictionnaire Philosophique (1764) The Art of War: A practical guide to applying what Voltaire said 2000 years before he said it.
A "string of videos dedicated to proving [yourself] wrong"? Now I see that as the mark of someone who enjoys learning and respects knowledge. Well done, sir. Well done.
Great video and so great to see more history makers on Chinese historical figures! I have some suggestions for further Chinese History Makers: - Sima Qian, The Grand Historian (I know you've mentioned him a bunch but a deep dive into his historiography and unique structuring of historical narrative is really cool) - Du Fu, the poet historian (a Tang Dynasty poetic master who captured the mood and complexities of the mid-Tang Dynasty) - Li Qingzhao, the Great Lyric Master of the Song (an incredible lyric poet of the Song dynasty but her work also includes early works of literary criticism and historical memoir) - Luo Guanzhong (the alleged author of Romance of the Three Kingdoms and a great way to discuss literary construction, historical fiction, and the Late Imperial publishing industry) There are also many many more from Sima Guang to Tang Xianzu to Kang Youwei!
When Sun Tzu was making his book he was making it for lords and emperors who really didn’t know much about warfare or who didn’t have the time to learn.
Exactly. There's also a lot of stuff about treating those under you with respect, not just doing the Russian thing of throwing bodies until the enemy gives up.
“The general who wins does many calculations in his temple before the battle, the general who loses does few calculations “ so basically think things out and strategize before fighting.
All warfare or game even sport have many factors to think before you started, know your opponent, chose the ground, put the correct man, and have strategy and team discipline. Are these calculations necessary? Do you play football or video games 😮
The best part about books is also Diffused Knowledge. We can sit here and go "Wow, moving out of the way is good for not dying?" in a modern era, but it is entirely possible that such was not so obvious back then.
I don't think the philosophy has been completely lost. Although I also think the best breakdown of the book was in The Potato War, so, 'nonconventional', but Technoblade was still the scholar I'd point to as understanding the art of the text best. He was as close to using the text for its intended purpose as we'll get in the modern day.
I havent wached this channel in a few years because i just havent been in the mood for it but i must say your skill at enthralling me has not petered out one bit, entertaining and informative in equal measure you and red are both phenomenal story tellers and writers. I love your work and hope you can do what you love as long as you live
The conscious effort on having correct pronunciation of Chinese names is well appreciated. We've come a long way since youtuber historians first discussed how some bovine named Cow Cow lost the battle at Red Cliffs in the Three Kingdoms period.
I was fortunate enough to read a translation that included history and commentary that was longer than the text. Personally, I did not find the text opaque and I credit the author of the translation I read for smoothing over my path.
The barrier to entry for Journey of the West is just Red's animations. Well done video, but I have to admit I now kinda want to go watch the Epic Rap Battle with the six Philosophers...
My favorite part of Sun Tzu's life is when he once met an Aztec god from Mexico named after a heavy metal band and they talked for a while about war philosophy while drinking tea.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, than you must fight." Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it. And then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor. *screams*
My favorite book of all time. While some of the sayings may seem simplistic, it's surprising how often we see them forgotten by generals throughout history.
When I read the art of war and came upon things that seemed obvious and common sense, I reminded myself of the old adage "every sign has a history". Common knowledge may be common, but not universal. And this period of histroy has with no doubt seen its fair share of upper-class twits fancying themselfs generals while being painfully oblivious of even the most basic rules of warfare.
I did a lot of research into Sun Tzu in university when writing a series of script bibles for my final project; I'm so happy to see the importance of his daoism mentioned in the video because I made that one of his central conflicts as a character; his efficiency at killing clashing against his beliefs and philosophy. also I thought the story at the beginning, where he kills the two concubines was both out of character, and completely within his daoist philosophy, if he truly believed this was the best way to gain power to then subdue the enemies of his people
Basic to us, but that's just your historical bias. It's like saying Socrates' work was simple and easy--you're entirely ignoring just how huge this was at the time. Tons of the concepts in it also aren't as simple as "higher ground is better," like Blue literally says in the video, it's about how to win without fighting, stuff that even some of the best military leaders have struggled with.
I forget where, but the greatest review of the Art of War I've seen was "People make fun of Sun Tzu for saying what should be obvious, but you have to realize that he's writing a war manual for a ruling class that has never seen mud".
Exactly! The bit about treating your people well so they'll trust you is a good lesson for the type of rulers that forget that people are people...
My favorite is someone summarizing it as:
"It's absolute genius level 4D chess when you're the kind of clueless commander who has to be reminded that your troops do, in fact, need food to not starve."
That's an unfair description. What you may call obvious, I call axiomatic: a truth so fundamentally unassailable that it can't be argued, only built upon.
Euclid's "The Elements" was based on incredibly "obvious" axioms, too, and it became the basis for all math and geometry for the next several millennia.
I believe that's Joe Kasabian from Lions Led by Donkeys. But I could be wrong.
Seriously, the level of disconnect between the ruling class and their people was so bonkers it's a wonder the whole concept of dynastic China didn't implode way before the Han came into the picture.
"Remember: switching to your secondary is faster than reloading" - Sun Tzu, Art of War
Your fruit killing skills are remarkable!
This was a key quote in the training of the Granaderon a Caballo in 1812
Well, he put it differently as he focussed more on grand strategy but I can definitely find it:
"Therefore, a skilled commander seeks victory from the situation and does not demand it of his subordinates."
It works if you consider your weapons your "subordinates". So you use the loaded sidearm you have, instead of lamenting the reload time of your main weapon (the reinforcement that are not here yet).
There are also multiple appeals to being decisive and showing intiative.
@@christopherg2347 Hell, treating your weapons like your subordinates is also something that he would agree with. If you properly take care of your weapons like you take care of your soldiers, then the chances of them failing and breaking in battle are lessened dramatically.
Reload your katanas
Sun Tzu once said: "I never fucking said that."
Jesus, Shakespeare, G. Washington, Plato, etc. : 'First time?'
Einstein: Condolences.
Some people just want to sound smart without having to do any actual research. - Albert Einstein
And in modern English?! Truly a man ahead of his time.
@@purplepedantry apparently Walt Whitman, too
The Art of War was had such an effect that now everything in the book seems obvious. At the time advice like "don't pick a fight if you think you will lose" was actually useful
In addition, we scoff at stating the obvious, but most colossal failures occur because people neglected the basics of their craft. Actually knowing, understanding and applying the basics of what you're doing is extremely valuable.
You'd think so, but an obvious concept to one person may not be seen as such as another, especially when it comes to history and war (for example, it doesn't matter how brilliant your tactician or general is, if the majority of your soldiers are starving to death because of terrible economic policy)
to be fair, much of what he said was also obvious to the people of the time. But he wasn't writing to them, he was writing to nepo babies obsessed with poetry. Forget a fight, these people had barely seen dirt. If I was writing for a more eloquent 15-year-old Elon Musk, I'd also keep insisting on "Thinking before acting" and "If you don't bring food your people will die and you will lose"
@@maromania7
It was basically the spiritual predecessor to "Basic civilized behaviour for Twitch Streamers".
"If you wish to walk, you must first stand up straight. Once you are on your feet, you must place one foot in front of the other. Only then can you attain motion."
Obvious to anyone over the age of 2, except if you've been riding in palanquins for 20 years because you're so allegedly superior to the rest of the human race.
"Dont show your strategies in a TH-cam Video - you fool, you absolute Idiot" - Sun Tzu
(He will always be connected to Technoblade for me, couldnt help myself)
Technoblade is why I actually even read some of the Art of War,
I wanted to better understand when the actual references ended and Techno’s original comedy began
Ooh that explains a lot the current popularity online.
(Poor Techno...)
RIP
Same bro
o7
The other historical context that one should consider with the Art of War was that Sun Tzu (or whoever wrote it) intended it not only as instructions to new generals, but also to monarchs who HIRED generals to lead their armies, with guidelines such as "don't hamper your military commanders if they're doing something right" or "consider how vital logistics are", clearly intended to rulers who might not understand the complexities of extended warfare from the comfort of their palaces. As such, the book can be read with a serious "As Per my last E-mail" vibe.
what does it mean by "as per my last email" vibe?
@@louistannudin2486 A passive-aggressive expression of exasperation at advice previously given, but not followed. A general sense of "This is the second time I’m telling you this. I don’t want to have to tell you again. Stop ignoring me!" couched in language that won't aggravate a thin-skinned authority
@louistannudin2486 office work reference. Basically a passive-aggressive way of going "I TOLD you about this problem a week ago, and you didn't do jack, don't come crying to me about it now."
On of the best example of that is found in chapter 3 :
"There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune upon his army:
- By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
- By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
- By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers."
This right here screams "Rulers, stop trying to manage the army!"
@@louistannudin2486 E-mails are very long text messages and can contain additional files, such as pictures or additional documents in text or PDF formats, in the form of attachments. E-mail usually requires access to a server (but not necessarily the internet) to send or receive and are generally considered a secure and reliable form of communication. In the early proto-internet an appropriately configured computer could be addressed and directly and receive e-mails as a stand-alone server. E-mail can also generally be accessed over slow connections and with low capacity devices unlike many current communication formats. (If you've read this far this is meant to be dry sarcasm.)
"Why people keep making a quote for me"
- Sun Tzu
Pretty sure that's a Spock line, actually.
I'm pretty sure that he actually WOULD say that
"I NEVER SAID THAT" - Sun Tzu
"Why did you make a fully literate writer like myself sound like I can't speak either of two languages?"
-Sun Tzu
"And that's why whenever a bunch of animals are together, it's called a Zoo!"
"Unless it's a farm!"
"Unless it's a Farm!!"
Tzu*
Unless its a farm!!
“First” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War.
The only first comment that’s actually funny
😂
Enjoy this Blue Shell for your troubles
@@redshirt8611Commandeering that. 🐢💙
Fact:
"Victorious warriors win "first" and then go to war..." - Sun Tzu
"There are not more than five cardinal tastes (sour, acrid, salt, sweet, bitter), yet combinations of them yield more flavors than can ever be tasted." - Sun Tzu, "The Art of War" (This is an actual quote from Chapter 5.)
Parallels the five elements, directions ( inward is counted ), the smells, main organs of the body, musical notes ( pentatonic scale used by China ), and many more.
It's important not to act on a quotation from this book: learn and use it all at once, and all the time, basically.
@@stevetheduck1425 Which is a lesson in strategy in and of itself. Gods, this book is deeper than I thought.
It could also be read as a comment on synergy, and the idea of "the whole being more than the sum of the parts."
An accurate quote of the art of war, not a meme one? In my youtube comment section? Hallelujah!
"Treat your men like your beloved sons and they will follow you into the deepest valley "-Sun Tzu the art of war
"Pay a man enough, and he'll walk barefoot through Hell." - David Xanatos
Depends on the man tbh@@templarw20
@@Splicer-lb5xb Depends what you're paying them with. The phrase "every person has a price" doesn't necessarily refer to money after all.
@@templarw20
Frederick the Great: "Why are you fleeing, do you dogs want to live forever?!"
Soldier: "At this paygrade, yes"
@@gunnarschlichting9886 I suppose that makes sense.
"Cherry-picking quotes is the enemy of wisdom."
Truly, Blue was one of the greatest philosophers of the early 21st century.
whos blue
@@rachard the guy talking in the video
“You may think that the book you just read is about war, but really it’s for MBAs and executives, as a guide to create the most toxic work environment imaginable.”
- Sun Tzu
You think you're joking, but you're not that far off lmao
Which doesn’t make any damn sense, because the book literally tells the reader to treat those under their command as well as possible.
@@Beowulf_DW that's the thing with quotable literature. You can pick and chose which parts you listen to or showcase.
@@Beowulf_DW But by ancient Chinese military standards, "treat them well" meant "don't whip them too much".
The book explicitly calls out to treat your subordinates firmly but fairly:
Book 9, lines 42-44:
If soldiers are punished before they have grown attached to you, they will not prove submissive; and, unless submissive, then will be practically useless. If, when the soldiers have become attached to you, punishments are not enforced, they will still be unless.
*Therefore soldiers must be treated in the first instance with humanity,* but kept under control by means of iron discipline. This is a certain road to victory.
If in training soldiers commands are habitually enforced, the army will be well-disciplined; if not, its discipline will be bad.
Been a fan of this book since my teens.
If someone wants to buy it, make sure you get a version that includes annotations by later chinese military strategists (which also might be forged or fictional btw). Context, commentary, explanations and funny little anecdotes. Like the one about a commander of a besieged city who sealed up a jar of piss, made up to look like fancy wine, and sent it to the opposing commander as a gift: in order to provoke him into an insanely costly all-out attack. "General so-and-so became enraged and ordered his troops to swarm up the walls like ants." Followed by further comment: "The calamity of these assaults is such that even if they succeed a commander might lose nine tenths of his troops."
I also feel that despite how much the book endorses cold ruthlessness and deceit, it has undercurrents of humanity. The author is telling you that if suck at this stuff, your soldiers will die, your country will be empoverished, your people will starve, and possibly you will be conquered and subjugated by hostile neighbors. I'm a Swede. The worst king we ever had (Charles XII) was a brilliant battlefield tactician and a personal badass, who followed every victory with another campaign, another war. When he finally died, our country was sucked dry, partly depopulated, broke and indebted up to our ears, and we had a bunch of neighbors that hated our guts, including Russia. That moron could have used a little Sun Tzu in his reading diet.
Thanks for another great episode,
Cheers!
He's actually kinda like Machiavelli, the brutal pragmatism and cold strategy is there because overall it is less costly and results in less suffering for the people being led. Even if the leader doesn't care about their people, since the writings makes sense and works then the leader reading it is more likely to follow the advice/teachings, which is better for their people than the alternative.
Do you have some recommendations on specific copies I should be looking out for? Thanks!
@@gunnarschlichting9886 Absolutely. Another book I was really into in my teens btw. Anyway, Blue has already made a really god video on old Niccolo, so I don't want to go into it too long here. I'm not the first person to find it hard to nail down the true authorial intent of The Prince. Is it satire? Is he saying "If I must have an authoritarian, can I at least get a competent one!"? Or is he sincerely licking the buttcrack of the guy in the dedication because he really want a new job? All of the above?
But I do think it's clear, from his other writings, that he thought that a republic was a superior system to a dictatorship.
@@ace_verco Sorry, no. I've seen a lot of thin paperbacks in the "Management and Business" sections of bookstores without. But you'll just have to open it up and see if the numbered statements from Sun Tzu are standalone, or if they're interspersed with cursive comments starting with the name of the commentator. They have names like Li Ch'üan, Tu Mu, Chang Yü and Ts'ao Ts'ao. As I understand it, some of these guys are historical figures, but that doesn't mean the comments are provably theirs. My latest copy is The new illustrated edition, translated by Samuel B. Griffith, Watkins Publishing. Good luck.
Emphatically seconded. My personal favorite is a pair of stories:
1) commander leaves a note on a tree in a valley he knows the enemy will pass through that night. Only the officers know how to read, so when a torch lights up, he knows exactly where the enemy leadership is...and that's the signal for the archers to let loose on that location.
2) same guy finally gets pinned down, hopelessly outnumbered in a fort that can't hold off what's against him. He has them open the gates, and sits down playing music like there isn't an enemy army in front of him. The enemy commander decides "he's probably bluffing but I'm not gonna risk it, after last time" and goes home 😂
Some real gems in those commentaries, plus useful notes on historical context, measurement equivalents, etc.
"all warfare is based"
-Sun Tzu. the art of war
"based on what?"
-Uzt Nus. The blank canvas of peace
@@ROBOTPETER101
"You're telling me a shrimp fried this rice?"
- Duz Nutz “The art of food critique” written in 344 BC.
@@Saint_Wolf_ "Keep it coming, they love it!"
(intelligent shrimp sounds)
“Such lewd eyebrows”
So here's where my Centurii brothers have been.
“Don’t put all of your secrets into a TH-cam video, you fool” - Sun Tzu, Art of War
E
Е
E
E
E
"When you see the enemy, you will know where the enemy is." -Sun Tzu, The Art of War.
Sun Tzu, the guy everyone cites and nobody knows if the citations are real because (almost) nobody who cites him read his book.
I have read a few chapters at least. While his wisdoms do seem like no-brainers they are flanked by comtemplation that provides context for the quotes, and as Blue stated they make perfect sense for a Daoist vision on harmony and effortless action. The style is not working well for a modern audience, because the way the text is written, it feels more like individual quotes, even if the chapters basically need to be read as a whole. Combine that with the fact that, from the Zhou dynasty onwards, China never had a primary martial class like samurai, knights or similar warriors, and most of their warriors were courtiers who were not good enough to get to the top of the bureaucratic ladder, and the text makes much more sense as a general introduction to how a Daoist military leader or warlord should approach warfare: by ensuring that war is the last resort, and by making sure that if war breaks out, you have so much advantage that the war is a foregone conclusion.
Which, given how modern military campaigns are playing out, is not even that stupid of a lesson, apparently.
It's really dry though.
@@the_tactician9858 They seem obvious because we’ve had 3,000-odd years to incorporate them into our collective zeitgeist.
The fake quotes are clearly jokes, mainly coming from the TH-camr Technoblade, who used to make those jokes before he passed away.
"Only speak when it improves on silence"
That´s a motto more people should take to heart. Especially on the internet
"IF FIGHTING IS SURE TO RESULT IN VICTORY, THEN YOU MUST FIGHT!"
-Sun Tzu said that.
And I’d say he knows a little more about fighting than you do pal, because he INVENTED IT!
And then he perfected it so that no living man could beat him in the ring of honor!
THEN he used his fight money to buy two of every single animal on Earth!
and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one
@@xenocross6597 *American screaming*
I always liked the interpretation that the author(s?) of the Art of War were writing for the most boneheaded nobles who slept through military school on the strength of their family names and could not stay focused on anything longer than the meme explanation of basic strategy.
I guess? The problem being a general in those times was that there was no military school. The only way to learn was through experience, which is notably dangerous. Having a manual explaining fundamental concepts and the mindset to best implement them was groundbreaking.
Generalship even in the most organised states back then was experienced based.
With commanders learning from an older teacher and maybe a book like this for reference.
Well, that kind of ignores the whole daoist context and inspiration of The Art of War.
@@LuperisNone I mean, not necessarily. Remember, these people would be firmly aware of Daoist principles. If you want to teach someone something, a good way is to put it in a way that they already understand. Need to teach a newly appointed general who spent his childhood as a noble's son? Explain grand strategy through the lens of concepts found in the philosophy you learned.
As an owner of a translated copy, it's a surprisingly slim and concise treatise. I feel reading it back to back with the Prince does something to one's brain however. So I did a chaser of Crime and Punishment.
Funnily enough I did similarly on a 12 hour flight once. Read the Art of War, followed by The Prince. Then on the, shorter, flight home read Siddhartha. Was a very strange but delightful time.
@@joendeo1890You have extremely fine taste. My favourite reading is when two books have a tenuous link on the surface but get more connected over time. The best/worst double bill I ever did was Tess of the d'Urbervilles followed by Notre-Dame de Paris. I don't know what emo shiz I was on but *mistake*!!!
@@Firegen1 I recommend Une si Longue Lettre (So Long a Letter) By Miriama Bâ and Une Vie de Boy (House Boy) By Ferdinand Oyo as a double whammy as they both cover elements of Colonial and Post-Colonial French West Africa.
@@joendeo1890I standby my first statement
*adds to book list* Appreciate you! I am definitely up for that. I'm way behind on my Alys Fowler at the moment and my friend's brilliant book on adult autism. Will catch up
@@Firegen1 small disclaimer. House Boy has some very intense moments. So if you are sensitive to those be careful.
"When presented with the option to pursue Lu Bu, do not." - Sun Tzu playing Dynasty Warrriors
"I never said half the crap people said I did" - Sun Einstein
All*
Cool image, haven't thought about code lyoko in years
@@sandrosliske Same here. Gotta binge watch the series again soon.
Sulbert Einstzu
@@akepatherainwing145 glad to serve 😉
So, I was assigned this book as part of my martial arts training. I've read it multiple times since and I remember being blown away by just how much of the book is basically "war and fighting are foolish. Maybe don't do that."
How to war:
1. Don't
@@codebracker2.) But if the other guy is really itching to hurt you, here's what you do...
Yeah, I was also surprised when I got into martial arts two years back how modern martial artists have the growing mentality of "the best way to win a fight is to avoid it, but if you can’t then knowing how to fight goes a long way". I guess the more you learn about fighting, the more you realise that there’s rarely a real winner in a serious fight instead of only different degrees of loser.
I feel like a lot of the wisdom in "The Art of War" is illustrative of the differences between fictional conflict and reality. An army is at its strongest before it fights a battle and weakest immediately after, regardless of whether they won or lost, but a hero is at their apex directly after a victory. The logic of heroic warriors is much more intuitive to the human mind, and that means when anyone is put in charge of an army, it will feel like a waste if they don't actually do some fighting. That's why Sun Tzu devotes so much energy to explaining how you can accomplish much more by making it clear that you WOULD win a fight, instead of actually fighting.
Had a history of warfare class in college that was really fun. The Art of War was one of the textbooks, and one assignment was to pick a battle, and analyze it using the book. I chose one of the battles of Acre during the crusades, as I was also reading a history of the Knights Templar at the time("Dungeon, Fire, and Sword," if anyone is interested). Ended up being quite the laundry list of how the attacking crusaders screwed up...
Like... my dudes, a handful of you get through a city wall, and you have most of your guys STOP OTHERS FROM ENTERING so you can win more glory. Not making this up...
Look up Lions led by Donkeys. As much as people meme about the Art of War being ‘obvious’…uh…people in militaries have always been very dumb.
The Crusaders especially were a collection of complete idiots who multiple times got themselves trapped and slaughtered because they decided “who needs this thing called ‘water?’ Our troops survive on faith! Hey why is everyone dying of heat stroke?”
@@tenkiforecastMilitary men are rarely dumb. Or blind. But ignorant of how or why to win battles, oh yes. So very much.
- and for most of history, officers came from the ruling classes, who had other people to do everything for them, which means utterly ignorant leaders, killing competent soldiers.
@@stevetheduck1425 "officers came from the ruling classes, who had other people to do everything for them, which means utterly ignorant leaders" Unless - Wait for it! - You're the Mongols.
Seriously though, much of The Art of War sounds like it would be obvious to anyone with a brain, but you have to remember how many military leaders throughout history have been dumb as posts.
Honestly, that is not as unbelievable as you might think.
An exercise I'd find fascinating is critiquing campaigns and generals regarded as highly successful through Sun Tzu's thought. There's a book about applying old military thought to history by Bevin Alexander that I want to give a try, hopefully it will have some of that.
From what I've read, by the time of the end of the Han dynasty, the Art of War was actually falling into obscurity as a military text; for something so straightforward, it was apparently considered somewhat impenetrable and not particularly applicable. The general and statesman Cao Cao sort of rescued it from the dustbin of history, requiring his subordinates to read it while providing his own commentaries on it that helped recontextualize its lesson to be more understandable; I seem to recall reading somewhere that for a long time, his annotated version was thought to be the original, until a copy that predated him was found. Incidentally, I think Cao Cao would make for an interesting episode History-Makers, or at least merits a look; after all, how often can someone claim to be not just an incredibly capable general (arguably the best in his part of the world at the time), a talented and forward-thinking administrator, AND rank as one of the period's three foremost poets (the other two being his sons)?
AND on top of that get a reputation of ruthlessness that rivals that of Genghis Khan.
But yes, Sun Tzu walked so Cao Cao could run, basically, because Cao Cao was a master in doing exactly what Sun Tzu advocated: ensuring that if a fight is to break out, all advantages are on your side.
Resulting in moments like when he alledgedly invited his enemy and former friend Yuan Shao to discuss terms for his surrender right before the battle commenced, only to reveal that he only did it to win time so that not only his cavalry, which he had sent out to ride around to the rear of the enemy army, could arrive on time, but also that the sun now stood behind his troops, forcing his enemies to fight with the sun shining straight in their eyes! That is 100% the kind of thing Sun Tzu advices to do.
@@the_tactician9858Not many renowned poets can claim to have had tens of thousands of noncombatants buried alive with the justification that they were inhabitants of large swathes of recently occupied territory who could neither be fully trusted not to revolt, nor could they be properly provided for with the resources available at the time, no. Cao Cao was utterly brilliant in so many ways, a true polymath, and he also committed or ordered a number of completely monstrous acts; there's a reason he became such a staple villain in Chinese opera, and why the Chinese equivalent of the phrase "speak of the devil" refers to him. He's an utterly fascinating figure, by turns admirable and repugnant.
@@JasynSuin "He's an utterly fascinating figure, by turns admirable and repugnant." This is very well said, both your comments are, but that last part is going to stick with me.
"Incoming arrows have the right of passage over you. Seek an alternate path." --Sun Zoo, _The Fart Of Snore_
@@baspagrey1545I'm personally not gay but also real
"All warfare is based..." -Sun Tzu
Which is ironically the opposite point of the book, which is "winning with as little effort and actual violence as possible."
On top of that, the first chapter, which entirely too many people skip over because it references stuff like chariot logistics that isn't directly applicable anymore, is basically just a couple dozen variations on "war sucks please don't".
A great quote is to never interrupt an enemy when they are making a mistake
Fun fact: Ironically, one of the most famous people to ever miss the point of the Art of War was a statesman who worked for Qin and was responsible for transforming it into a major military power through his reforms.
Shang Yang, a statesman and Legalist, was very much in favor of war as a tool to keep the populace under control. Even though the Art of War stated that fighting a war should be a last resort.
He wrote a lot of laws about how nobility and commoners should be punished all the same since a screw-up is a screw-up and that every punishment should be harsh as a deterrent for further screw ups.
Those laws bit him in the ass, though. He got the death sentence.
As memory serves, it also collapsed the Qin dynasty; a commander knew they'd be severely punished for tardiness due to getting caught in bad weather, so he went pirate. Other commanders who went after him failed to capture him, and knowing the same fate awaited them...just joined up. This snowballed quickly.
When you use your most powerful weapons immediately, you have nothing to escalate to, and when you tell your opponent that defeat means death, they will fight to the death rather than accept it lying down. Sun Tzu was extremely explicit about that, recommending leaving your opponent a small road of escape rather than putting their back against the wall.
But that, of course, would require enough reading comprehension to understand that the lessons are applicable beyond the battlefield.
@@SparkSovereign Not a commander, Liu Bang was the equivalent of a small town sheriff who went outlaw with the group of prisoners he was transporting. He also founded the Han Dynasty.
@@SparkSovereign And that is Han propaganda, because recently unearthed Qin documents suggested the law at the time didn't subject those with slight failures to death sentence. Liu Bang didn't fail to deliver criminal and rebel in fear of excution. He saw an oppturnity to become a warlord and took it, but obviously that wouldn't sound nice for propaganda. You can't just tell people that the emporer used to be a sheriff who frees criminals to gain power, you say "His hand was forced, totally, trust me bro, also don't bother looking up Qin law because its all burnt already."
@@lolasdm6959 fascinating! Discrediting previous regimes to make yours look better is a time honored atrocity, but I imagine there at least had to be some serious public frustration with the Qin legal system for it to be a believable claim, even if the details were wildly exaggerated. If nothing else, I unfortunately have met people who believed the tale as described...and thought it was a shame such a legal system wasn't around any more🫠
I'll have to read up on the latest research at some point. Dunno when I'll have time, but if you've got a recommendation for something accessible online I'm all ears.
""Fly high Techno" - Sun Tzu, The Art of War.
*"TECHNO PLANE~"*
👑
🐷
✈️
Also the Skeppy vid made me cry harder 😭🥲
"People die when they are killed"
-Sun Tsu, probably
With lessons like "food and rest are important for an army", "don't stop your subordinates from doing shit right" and "don't fight if you'll loose" I wouldn't be surprised if you were right
@@agustinvenegas5238 And yet somehow there are examples in every century of armies that forgot those very lessons.
@@agustinvenegas5238 I mean, jokes aside, that was _kinda_ the point. It *seems* obvious at face value... but, I mean, [broadly gestures everywhere]. Think about *all* the dense MFs you've met who totally miss the point on a daily basis. The people for whom the blatantly obvious either sails right over their head, or repeatedly smacks them in the face and they still don't seem to notice.
That's what Taoism is all about:
Step 1) Get out of your own way
Step 2) _Stay_ out of your own way
Can you _honestly_ say that most people can follow those two basic steps? Can you honestly say that *you* do on a regular basis? The Art of War was about the practical application of those principles.
"The successful warrior finds victory first, and only _then_ enters battle.
The warrior doomed to defeat enters battle first, and only then looks for a path to victory."
But when it comes to actually putting it into _practice..._ would you? Could you? Or do you habitually leap before you look?
This honestly feels like half a quote from Art of War. Though it's actually from Fate/Stay Night, Shirou Emiya specifically.
It's also missing so many layers of context. Like the second half of "That's the way things should be". In a setting where many people do not actually die when killed. Or just the whole it being a take on a Japanese Proverb.
As a final bit of pedantic ; Die =/= Killed. Not only are they different tenses they have slightly different meanings and used cases.
Nearly missed this one, Techno count is up to 15
"Blood for the Blood God"
- Sun Tzu, The Art of War
*"TECHNO NEVER DIES!"* - The Real Sun Tsu, 21st Century Edition
"Skulls for the Skull Throne"
If you wish to defeat me you must train for another 10.000 years
"Subscribe to Overly Sarcastic Productions for more diatribes on history, non-fiction, and fiction."
~Sun Tzu, The Art of War
What amazes me about The Art of War is not how basic it is, but how few people can truly grasp it. Part of this though is how much of it is easier said than done, like how few know what it means to know your self.
"Arrows hurt more than words, but words can leave deeper scars. Unless you take an arrow to the knee. Or the eye. Or the groin. Actually, arrows are pretty bad news, you should avoid them."
-Sun Zu (pre-editor)
Is this quoting Sheogorath? Because this definitely feels like something the daedric princeof madness would say
"fly like a butterfly, sting like a bee."
- Sun Tzu, The Art of War
Sun Tzu is the spiritual ancestor to anyone who's had to explain basic logic to tech bros or those who work customer-service
“I’m so famous I’m still making quotes after death.”
Sun Tzu
One benefit of having all your generals trained from the same text,
even when isolated and out of contact with each other,
they will still be able to anticipate each other's actions/responses to events
and so act in ways to support each others efforts.
"Have the high ground and it's all over." - Sun Tzu
He warns against this very thing. A hill can anchor one end of your front, but troops on a hill are useless.
Napoleon, for example ( who may have read Sun Tzu in French translation ) won a battle by taking and then leaving a hill, while much of the battlefield was covered by mist.
@@stevetheduck1425 Huh, I was just trying to make a Star Wars funny.
"don't underestimate your enemy" - einstein
@@stevetheduck1425 Yeah Sun Tzu said to charge down from above will defeat the enemy like cutting laterally through bamboo.
"A fool is angered by the hole in his pocket.
The wise man uses it to scratch his balls."
'Sun Tzu
Yeah!!! Blood for the Blood God!!!
Dance potato boy DANCE!!!
@@CopperCanary21I’ve read some of it, and it’s not very long! Very possible lol
A throne of skulls is a terrible idea. Skulls have little in the way of flat surfaces, in fact, the teeth are more likely to become a problem. Corpse thrones in general are inefficient as well, the conclusion Khorn is overly edgy, does not think about policy and a terrible tactician.
I mean, only if you put them tooth side up
FOR GRAND CATHAY! FOR THE CELESTIAL DRAGON EMPEROR!
"I didn't say any of that shit what the fuck."
-Sun Tzu
"DO THEM DIRTY IN FRONT OF THEY DAD!"
-Sun Tzu
"Take him... to Detroit!"
Honestly, I don't understand how anyone could read _The Art of War_ and NOT see it as a deeply philosophical text. That's WHY it has so many applications to life. It only has value and meaning when understood as a meditation and a thought process, not as an instructional manual.
Consider, for example, a different translation of the "supreme excellence" quote: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good. [...] Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."
Note: *breaking the enemy's resistance.* Not defeating them. Not cowing them. Not shaming them. Breaking their resistance. But you know what else breaks an enemy's resistance? _Making them your allies._ And alliance achieves what warfare cannot: the complete and total preservation of infrastructure, expertise, and resources.
Or another: "If I determine the enemy's disposition of forces while I have no perceptible form, I can concentrate my forces while the enemy is fragmented. The pinnacle of military deployment approaches the formless: if it is formless, then even the deepest spy cannot discern it nor the wise make plans against it."
This presents the conundrum that the best successes are achieved through discipline and rigor, but discipline and rigor naturally present themselves as conformity, consistency, uniformity--as _patterns._ We must achieve a higher, greater pattern; we must achieve discipline so transcendent, it exceeds the bounds of nature itself, and becomes _new_ nature. But this carries over to every other part of life: not to destroy what is natural, but to elevate what is directed, intended, purposeful, until it becomes a new, complementary nature all its own. When discipline becomes instinctive, automatic, one might say _effortless,_ then the greatest mastery of all is achieved. This applies to any skill one can develop.
_The Art of War_ is the specific application of philosophy to conflict. But _all of life_ can be understood as conflict; how terrible conflict can be, how much damage it can cause, and yet how difficult life can be if we reject ever facing it. That's what makes _The Art of War_ beautiful; it is, in a sense, a pacifist's guide to ending conflict as quickly, efficiently, and non-destructively as possible. Understood as a lens for viewing the difficulties of life, rather than as a bunch of dull platitudes, it presents a new way of viewing the world, one that may help break a person out of bad patterns (habits, relationships, coping mechanisms, family issues, etc., etc.) they've fallen prey to. It's not about everything--there is much to life that is not conflict, about which the book says nothing--but for the things it's made to examine, it is quite a feat.
1:21 "What next, if you're enemy's shooting arrows at you, consider not getting shot by them?"
Ah yes, a callback to that time you kept trying to shoot people in the head, and they kept not getting shot in the head by you.
Literally exactly that. -B
“Stop making silly quotes about me!”
- Sun Wu Kong
😂🐒👑
Kame hame haa
Sun Goku
"Through out heavens and earth i alone am the honored 1"
-seiten taisei,the primate emperor
"hey, you look pretty strong!" -Sun Goku
"Stupid, dumb, neck trap!"
-- also Sun Wukong
The Greatest victory is that which requires no battle. Epic wisdom
“Honor the blood god, helping spread my name. Technoblade Never Dies” -Sun Tzu
Yessss!
One of my favorite sayings about combat is also a "duhh", but also matters immensely:
"The first rule of combat is:
Don't get shot."
"You laugh, but you'd be suprised how many people seem to FORGET this when the bullets are flying."
“If fighting is sure to result in victory then you must fight”
Sun Tzu said that, and I think he knows a little more about fighting than you do pal because he invented it
@oskarsborowski so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor!
@@Splicer-lb5xbdo you know about the game team fortress two, produced and distributed by valve software?
@@LexYeen I've heard of it, why?
@@Splicer-lb5xbBecause you replied to a humorous quote from a promotional video from this game, mistaking it for a serious statement.
@@GarlicPudding Then he used his fight money to buy 2 of every animal on earth,
I've been studying this text (as a layman nerd, not an academic) for a couple of decades, and I absolutely have to emphasise Blue's point about the value of the SunTzu as a Taoist text.
Having read various translations (including business text commentaries and military historian takes), I must recommend the Denma Translation Group's gorgeous version.
Some of the text translation can a little opaque to a 21st century round-eye, but their commentary opens up a world of understanding and is deeply aware of the Taoist philosophical underpinnings of it.
That said, if this is your first time at Sun Tzu club, you might do better to start with Thomas Cleary - it's an easier read. The Denma might not be the best choice for Baby's First Art of War :)
Anyway I think they're both still in print at Shambhala Press.
P.S. I hope I'm not breaking the rules by doing something other than adding to the Edge and Snark in these here comments.
I love the concept behind, "do everything you can not to actually fight" cause it turns out armies are really expensive and throwing the around is a good way to break those toys. No army, no authority. Or as a wise youtube man once said
"China is whole again, China is broke again."
In a multipolar conflict, throwing your army away in an attritional war against enemy A, even if you win, means you have nothing left to defend your other border against enemy B.
"It's Tzuing time."
-Sun Tzu
I like the part where he Tzued all over them.
It was truly one of the Tzuisms of all time
"Make love, not war" - Sun Tzu
-The art of love
"Take memes seriously. Start fights over jokes." Sun Tzu
"I prefer to do both." Borris the Animal
_"You can't beat me, if I don't exist."_
-Sun Tzu
This classic text by Master Sun's (and make no mistake, he was a Jedi Master) was an excellent contribution to the Jedi Archives! They are now finally complete!
But seriously, there is a lot in the Art or War and Daoism that align with Jedi Philosophy. Viewing everything in relation to a greater whole? That's literally how all aspects of life are connected to the Force. And as Jedi, our job is establish peace that but requires more than just talking. It requires political understanding, understanding of people, and understanding of warfare when the situation demands it. We are trained in all these facets of life becasue we must employ them depending one the situation.
Effortless action is also very Jedi. Jedi do not want to intervene unless they have to. We use violence as a last resort and would rather people solve problems amongst themselves as those solutions come from the people and will be carried on by them after we are gone (Ex how Qui-Gon handled the Naboo conflict between the Naboo, Gungans, and Trade Federation). The highest excellence is to subdue an enemy without fighting at all? Luke himself "defeated" Vader and the Emperor by choosing not the fight and not kill Vader. The specific situation allowed for that highest excellence to be achieved, whereas less favorable situations, like the Rebels fighting to blow up the Death Star, are still allowed just accomplished with the aim of being as quick and efficient as possible.
Like Daoists, Jedi are just as internal in their philosophy as they are external in their actions. They are expected to accomplish great things in the galaxy and establish peace but that's only possible if they can achieve internal harmony with the Force. To conquer the Dark Side in the world around them (war, suffering, treachery, oppression) they must first conquer the Dark Side within themselves (fear, anger, hate, arrogance). That's why Anakin and Luke both faced internal struggles as reflections of their external struggles.
Blue! Massive Applause.
Admitting your wrong is easier than
Correcting your mistakes,
But you have a more powerful skill,
Turning that correcting into a teaching moment for others.
Love hearing your love and enthusiasm for the things you enjoy.
Keep rocking the song of your life,
It makes the lives of so many more better just to listen.
Walk softly and carry a big gun
- Sun Tzu
“Hope is a path to disappointment “
-Sun Tsu the art of war
"Knowledge is power. Guard it Well"
"if fighting is to result in victory, then you must fight!"
-Sun Tzu
I always thought it was sadly fascinating how much emphasis Sun Tzu put into mercy and diplomacy in The Art of War. He makes clear that it's far better to avoid war if you can; to avoid battle if you can; to capture enemy troops, rather than kill them all; and to treat them mercifully, not just because he put a strong emphasis on humanity - though he certainly did - but as a matter of logistics. If your cause is just, and you treat your prisoners as human beings, you might even be able to convince a large part of them to join your side, willingly. At least, he advised this very action in Chapter 2, Waging War, in the second to last paragraph. He doesn't directly say "recruit captured soldiers", but he was just talking about reusing captured chariots, then advised treating captured soldiers well, and ended the paragraph by stating "[t]his is the tactic of using the defeated enemy to increase your strength." Although I thought I heard before that recruiting POWs is a war crime, and I'm just an occasional book reader, so maybe don't listen to me too well! Although it seems Sun Tzu is talking about voluntary recruitment of humanely-treated prisoners, without negative consequences for refusal, as opposed to less savory and voluntary press-ganging at gunpoint...
He was writing in the context of a multipolar conflict with constantly shifting alliances. If you are seen by everyone as too ruthless and bloodthirsty, then pretty soon everyone will be joining forces against you and you're hooped no matter how brilliant you are individually. And if you show mercy to a defeated enemy, after a few years of shifting diplomatic realities, that enemy might now become a needed ally.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, then you must fight!"
- Sun Tzu
And I’d say he knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it!
I remember reading The Art of War when I was in middle school for fun. The only parts I kinda remember are his advice on what raiding stances to take depending on how thick into enemy territory you are in, how likely troops are to desert based on how close they are to the front lines, and him saying "if you are at a higher elevation from your enemy, flow down onto them like water" or something to that effect and talking about how an army should move fluidly and avoid moving up mountains and hills. Thought it was kinda cool stuff.
"This stuff is obvious!" -you
"It is sometimes said, common sense is very rare."
- Voltaire, Dictionnaire Philosophique (1764)
The Art of War: A practical guide to applying what Voltaire said 2000 years before he said it.
A "string of videos dedicated to proving [yourself] wrong"? Now I see that as the mark of someone who enjoys learning and respects knowledge. Well done, sir. Well done.
"Empty and become full" was the strategy I used each time I waged war on the food I just digested then (after sitting on the throne) eat again.
Great video and so great to see more history makers on Chinese historical figures! I have some suggestions for further Chinese History Makers:
- Sima Qian, The Grand Historian (I know you've mentioned him a bunch but a deep dive into his historiography and unique structuring of historical narrative is really cool)
- Du Fu, the poet historian (a Tang Dynasty poetic master who captured the mood and complexities of the mid-Tang Dynasty)
- Li Qingzhao, the Great Lyric Master of the Song (an incredible lyric poet of the Song dynasty but her work also includes early works of literary criticism and historical memoir)
- Luo Guanzhong (the alleged author of Romance of the Three Kingdoms and a great way to discuss literary construction, historical fiction, and the Late Imperial publishing industry)
There are also many many more from Sima Guang to Tang Xianzu to Kang Youwei!
“Why is everyone quoting me, I never said like half those things” -Sun Tzu, the art of war
When Sun Tzu was making his book he was making it for lords and emperors who really didn’t know much about warfare or who didn’t have the time to learn.
Do not use a cannon to kill a mosquito -Sun Tzu
But I like the cannon!😢
This isn't the first time I've heard this statement.
Dude was the original "Dodge!". I mean sometimes you have to sometimes explain basic strategy that probably wasn't that obvious at the time.
Exactly. There's also a lot of stuff about treating those under you with respect, not just doing the Russian thing of throwing bodies until the enemy gives up.
He never misses, the absolute History Maker!
The comment section did not fail me.
“The general who wins does many calculations in his temple before the battle, the general who loses does few calculations “ so basically think things out and strategize before fighting.
All warfare or game even sport have many factors to think before you started, know your opponent, chose the ground, put the correct man, and have strategy and team discipline. Are these calculations necessary? Do you play football or video games 😮
The best part about books is also Diffused Knowledge. We can sit here and go "Wow, moving out of the way is good for not dying?" in a modern era, but it is entirely possible that such was not so obvious back then.
I don't think the philosophy has been completely lost. Although I also think the best breakdown of the book was in The Potato War, so, 'nonconventional', but Technoblade was still the scholar I'd point to as understanding the art of the text best. He was as close to using the text for its intended purpose as we'll get in the modern day.
"BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!!"
- Sun Tzu
I havent wached this channel in a few years because i just havent been in the mood for it but i must say your skill at enthralling me has not petered out one bit, entertaining and informative in equal measure you and red are both phenomenal story tellers and writers. I love your work and hope you can do what you love as long as you live
The conscious effort on having correct pronunciation of Chinese names is well appreciated. We've come a long way since youtuber historians first discussed how some bovine named Cow Cow lost the battle at Red Cliffs in the Three Kingdoms period.
I was fortunate enough to read a translation that included history and commentary that was longer than the text. Personally, I did not find the text opaque and I credit the author of the translation I read for smoothing over my path.
Can you tell me about the author of the particular translation you read ?
"If fighting is sure to result in victory then you must fight!"
Sun Tzu said that!
"Oh no, the amount of misattributed quotes" -Sun Zun
@@baspagrey1545 you failed the parasocial vibe check I guess😅 (oh wait it's a bot)
"All warfare is based on deception." -Tommy Tallericozi
i was actually so hype for this, and it did not miss.
also, blood for the blood god, anarchy in all places
The barrier to entry for Journey of the West is just Red's animations.
Well done video, but I have to admit I now kinda want to go watch the Epic Rap Battle with the six Philosophers...
My favorite part of Sun Tzu's life is when he once met an Aztec god from Mexico named after a heavy metal band and they talked for a while about war philosophy while drinking tea.
"If fighting is sure to result in victory, than you must fight."
Sun Tzu said that, and I'd say he knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it. And then he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honor.
*screams*
“All warfare is based[…]” - an actual (albeit, abridged) Sun Tzu quote.
"Stop misquoting my brother you idiot" - moon tzu
My favorite book of all time.
While some of the sayings may seem simplistic, it's surprising how often we see them forgotten by generals throughout history.
“The only reason most people know of my book is because of a youtuber who was farming potatoes”
- Sun Tzu, the art of War
History makers is my favorite series on your channel love to see it
When I read the art of war and came upon things that seemed obvious and common sense, I reminded myself of the old adage "every sign has a history".
Common knowledge may be common, but not universal. And this period of histroy has with no doubt seen its fair share of upper-class twits fancying themselfs generals while being painfully oblivious of even the most basic rules of warfare.
Yeah. It's the same for "most stupid rules exists because somebody did something dumb."
I did a lot of research into Sun Tzu in university when writing a series of script bibles for my final project; I'm so happy to see the importance of his daoism mentioned in the video because I made that one of his central conflicts as a character; his efficiency at killing clashing against his beliefs and philosophy. also I thought the story at the beginning, where he kills the two concubines was both out of character, and completely within his daoist philosophy, if he truly believed this was the best way to gain power to then subdue the enemies of his people
Sun Tzu, the guy who gave the most basic battle strategy and was praised for it.
Like of course if you have higher ground you’ll win.
Archers go brrrr
Common sense is not common.
-----A retail worker
He was also ahead of his time with quotes such as: “All warfare is based[…]” - Sun Tzu
Basic to us, but that's just your historical bias. It's like saying Socrates' work was simple and easy--you're entirely ignoring just how huge this was at the time. Tons of the concepts in it also aren't as simple as "higher ground is better," like Blue literally says in the video, it's about how to win without fighting, stuff that even some of the best military leaders have struggled with.
"Never interrupt your enemy while they are making a mistake" is the most-applicable piece of advice that can apply to any adversarial situation.
"Point towards enemy" - Sun Tzu and also this Claymore antipersonel mine I found
Didn't expect a release so Sun-Tzoon.