Clausewitz exposed !

[VonClausewitz]

Interesting discussion with my lecturer-in-chief today, about Karl Von Clausewitz pre-dating another famous Karl in some of his suppositions about wars.

"War is a continuation of politik by other means"

Now, politik is a German word, with no direct translation. It was cooked up by romantic-era philosophers during the 19th century. The definition is as follows;

"It means politcs and policy, politics being the methods by which power is distributed throughout a nation, and how it is maintained in place, by whatever system of government, whilst policy is how said government goes about maintaining the status quo of said nation, with the aim of maintaining or expanding the influence of the political status quo."

Hell of a definition eh ? That's philosophers for you.

Thus, the famous maxim becomes;

"War is the way in which governments utilise policy to conduct violent means of maintaining a political status quo and/or expanding it's influence"

I thought some of you anti-war types might find something a little more intelligent useful to back up your arguments. Well, more useful than 'War is mean and nasty !'.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 02:21 AM
"War is the way in which governments utilise policy to conduct violent means of maintaining a political status quo and/or expanding it's influence"

I thought some of you anti-war types might find something a little more intelligent useful to back up your arguments. Well, more useful than 'War is mean and nasty !'.
If you mean intelligence, or intelligent argument then cheers ;) However why should their be anymore argument. Your use of the terms "mean and nasty" detract from the realities of war, insofar as it likens it to something not desrving of a harsher description. Even so, the fact that it is "mean and nasty" along with the fact that there will be loss is reason enough for war to not be an end in itself.

You don't go on to give an anti-war argument, unless you are appealing to something self evident i.e. a continuation of the "mean and nasty" argument itself.

Very few here are anti-violence, but in the context that you define I suppose the majority are anti-war in so much as it is the government that decide on the cause.

[OkaCrisis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 10:21 PM
Thus, the famous maxim becomes;

"War is the way in which governments utilise policy to conduct violent means of maintaining a political status quo and/or expanding it's influence"
Like, duh?

People aren't anti-war for no reason. They didn't just decide one day to be "pacifists", and somewhere down that road decided that it was cooler to be "Anti-War".

I'm sure most people in this forum also condemn Imperialist Wars and government maintenance of the status-quo today, and throughout history. That's pretty much what Communists do.

[VonClausewitz]

People aren't anti-war for no reason. They didn't just decide one day to be "pacifists", and somewhere down that road decided that it was cooler to be "Anti-War".

You really, honestly, would be surpirsed. My university is full of anti-war types, and not one of them can give me a reason beyond 'It kills people' for them being anti war. I thought that some (there undoubtedly will be) people like that in this site could use that little maxim to become little more proficient in their argument.

Plus, if the opponent doesn't know that Clausewitz was a military philosopher writing to improve strategical management of the Prussian army, then it sounds like the anti-war type really has looked into it.


I'm sure most people in this forum also condemn Imperialist Wars and government maintenance of the status-quo today, and throughout history. That's pretty much what Communists do.

Quite true, but you have to think, as I said above, how many just do it out of reverence for the dogmatists who preach pacifisitc things all of the time. Many people oppose war, but how many really understand it ? That quote by the way really is just a basic-level thing, there are many more reasons to be against a war than just government objectives.

[loveme4whoiam]

Many people oppose war, but how many really understand it?
Indeed - that is one of the very reasons I am studying Military History. War has shaped the globe, and the actions people take today. It is pure ignorance to ignore this, and simply saying "War is bad because people die", while being wholly accurate, is not the entirety of it.

I've read Von Clauswitz's work (at least, On War) and liked it, but I honestly never considered the connotations of that phrase. Cheers for bringing it to my attention, and I'm sure it will be a useful argument for any anti-war debater. No-one should ever take flak for pointing out a fresh argument to capitalism and imperialism - even if it may be obvious to you it might not be to someone else.