I often think about the fact that (arguably, of course) the greatest general of the 19th century started his military career as a quartermaster. I wonder if that gave Grant a perspective on supply and organization that was missing from his colleagues who didn't have that particular experience. He knew how to maintain a supply line, and he also knew when he could risk abandoning it. And the very last act which defeats Lee... is cutting him off from his food at Appomattox. Supply lines.
If you look at the course of recent intellectual history, Clausewitz was among the first systems theorists. He isn't read as the scientist he actually was. The resistance to proper systems thought in American circles is immensely irritating. Definitely changed how I perceive academia - and a lot of what passes for scholarship.
So thanks a lot for pushing back on the colonization of Clausewitz!
Very interesting article. I recently read Marie von Clausewitz: The woman behind the making of On War by V.E. Bellringer which gives a very readable context of von Clausewitz 's life based on the letters between Carl and Marie. I can only recommend it.
But infantry is also where you see all the "psychological" school -
The "psychological school" argues that the first and foremost aspect of infantryman should be unwavering motivation. The matter of fact is no infantryman ever could take part in the first firefight of a industrial attritional war and return home in one piece. They argue that for men to fight there need to be something more than simple material gain, death has a certain "supernatural" aspect. As you can see this school quickly turns into a "cult" in all senses. And this school is always political, this is in fact how a lot of far right politics originate, the kind of mobilization rhetoric directly mimic the way "psychological school" esprouts.
I often think about the fact that (arguably, of course) the greatest general of the 19th century started his military career as a quartermaster. I wonder if that gave Grant a perspective on supply and organization that was missing from his colleagues who didn't have that particular experience. He knew how to maintain a supply line, and he also knew when he could risk abandoning it. And the very last act which defeats Lee... is cutting him off from his food at Appomattox. Supply lines.
TBF beating the enemy by cutting his lines of supply was already kind of the default maneuver goal in 18th-century warfare...
If you look at the course of recent intellectual history, Clausewitz was among the first systems theorists. He isn't read as the scientist he actually was. The resistance to proper systems thought in American circles is immensely irritating. Definitely changed how I perceive academia - and a lot of what passes for scholarship.
So thanks a lot for pushing back on the colonization of Clausewitz!
Now, that Adolf could paint.
Very interesting article. I recently read Marie von Clausewitz: The woman behind the making of On War by V.E. Bellringer which gives a very readable context of von Clausewitz 's life based on the letters between Carl and Marie. I can only recommend it.
There is a typo - add “to” to the sentence “monarch attempted put the genie back in the bottle” (referencing mass mobilization)
This was awesome.
But infantry is also where you see all the "psychological" school -
The "psychological school" argues that the first and foremost aspect of infantryman should be unwavering motivation. The matter of fact is no infantryman ever could take part in the first firefight of a industrial attritional war and return home in one piece. They argue that for men to fight there need to be something more than simple material gain, death has a certain "supernatural" aspect. As you can see this school quickly turns into a "cult" in all senses. And this school is always political, this is in fact how a lot of far right politics originate, the kind of mobilization rhetoric directly mimic the way "psychological school" esprouts.