Sometimes what is true in macrocosm is true in microcosm. Reading military historian Victor Davis Hanson’s 2024 book “The End of Everything: How Wars Descend Into Annihilation” reminded me of this.
Hanson goes into scrupulous detail of cases across the millennia of nations utterly crushed, and city-states razed to the ground with their population enslaved or wiped out. With each, he analyzes the mistakes by defeated leaders, virtually all of which reminds someone who does what I do for a living that the very same mistakes turn individual potential victors into devastated victims.
Hanson addresses the Greeks versus the Macedonians, the devastation of Carthage, the sack of Constantinople, Byzantine versus Ottoman, Cortez’ small force’s conquest of Tenochtitlan, and more.
What led to the annihilations he focuses on? “We’ve done nothing wrong, those others have no reason to attack and destroy us.” Hopeless naivete. “We can fight with words, not weapons.” Sounds like de-escalation at its worst, the doomed concept of attempting to reason with the unreasonable. “We are so powerful, none can defeat us and therefore they will not try.” Hubris. “It has never happened (to us) before, so it will never happen.” Famous last words.
Being prepared to use maximum force doesn’t mean it has to be used. But being prepared and capable of doing so creates a deterrent effect that can prevent bloodshed on either side. In macrocosm, this concept has prevented the Planet Earth from becoming a burned-out cinder in space for about three-quarters of a century, since the then-Soviet Union became the second entity after the US to possess nuclear weapons. (There are now nine nations so capable, by the way.) The concept was called MAD: Mutually Assured Destruction. It said in essence, “Your country may try to destroy ours, but if it does, your country will assuredly be destroyed too.”
We see the same in microcosm, with armed citizens protecting themselves and those within the mantle of their protection via deadly weapons. Why do 90-some percent of armed citizen encounters, according to virtually every study, end with no bloodshed? Because the armed citizen drawing a gun is wordlessly telling the criminal aggressor, “You are threatening to harm me and mine, but if you try, YOU will surely cease to exist.”
In either scale, the intended victim is communicating to the threatening party that it has not only the same power level, but the absolute willingness to use it for a just and righteous purpose. “Deterrence” is the proper word.
Oddly enough, on the same trip when I read “The End of Everything” I was also re-reading Anthony Storr’s 1967 book “Human Aggression,” subtitled “A leading psychotherapist writes with wisdom and charm of the part this essential instinct plays in human life and how it can be turned to good advantage.”
I found that the two books paired well.
Quote of the Day:
“Si vis pacem, para bellum (If you want peace, prepare for war).” – Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus
This is very old wisdom. It is amazing how so many people, who are insolated within a comfortable lifestyle, think that this wisdom is obsolete and is no longer applicable to modern life.
Many discover, if they survive, their error when life turns, and bites them, and their comfortable existence is shattered into a million pieces.
I was recently reading an article from an old, old magazine that I recently acquired (off of Ebay, of course). It was a copy of ‘Blackbelt’ magazine from May 1986 (roughly 39 years old). One article was entitled ‘Model Mugging’.
It described a self-defense training course that taught women to fight off rapists. This course differed from the usual self-defense courses in that the mock attackers wore padded suits and the women were taught to fight back with FULL CONTACT blows to the head, eyes, throat, and groin. In other words, the women were being taught to fight back with MAXIMUM FORCE with the goal to disable their attacker within seconds.
The article gives the statistic that, even back in 1986, a rape was occurring every 30 seconds in the U.S. As our population has grown since then, I doubt that the rape statistics are any better today.
The article also highlights that, with hundred of women having taken the course, some had a chance to put their training into practice. The article lists that, at the time the article was written, 22 women reported rape attempts after their training. Of these 22 women:
1) Two (2) chose to not fight back (despite their training) and were raped.
2) Three (3) managed to escape and flee from their attacker.
3) Seventeen (17) chose to fight back with MAXIMUM FORCE. The result? ALL 17 managed to knock out or incapacitate their attacker with 5 seconds. These rapists got more than they bargained for!
The lesson? If you are attacked with lethal force, don’t respond with half-measures. If you must fight, then fight to win!
Storr’s book appears-at least at B&N-to be out of print. There appear to be several books of the same/similar title by other authors.
I’ll probably pick up the first book. Pity most of the folks who really need to read it are kings/queens of denial.
Not as cerebral, but “Left of Bang” by Black Irish Entertainment is worth a read.
Also by Victor Davis Hanson: “The Dying Citizen”
Very good blog post.
zane
Plaque at West Point “The hand of the aggressor is stayed by strength and strength alone” Dwight D. Eisenhower
Right. Those that will not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.. Too many nations are being lead/controlled by those willing to lead millions to their/our doom. What’s the saying about absolute power corrupting absolutely?..
Victor Davis Hanson is not just an historian, he offers better insight than most of current events as well. He has a large presence on YouTube and I try to find the time to listen as much as possible. His domestic political and geopolitical insight are a step above most. These insights are both valuable in business and investing.
“Peace through strength” is a phrase that suggests that military power can help preserve peace. It has been used by many leaders from Roman Emperor Hadrian in the second century AD to former US President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.
The idea has critics, with Andrew Bacevich stating, “‘Peace through strength’ easily enough becomes ‘peace through war.'”
Mas.
I’ve just bought the kindle edition based on your review.
I listened to VDH’s book a few months ago and we were certainly on all the paths of destruction he described right up to the inauguration. Elections have consequences.
You can spend your time in many worse ways than to read ANYTHING by Victor Davis Hanson. And there are many, many YouTube videos with him speaking about dozens of topics all of which he is well informed and extremely well spoken.
Agree.
Mas, I’ve been following your work now for near two decades. And I’ve been following Victor Davis Hanson for at leas three and a half. I never would have made a strong connexion between the two of you. But as I read this piece I got a great big SMACK MY HEAD moment. Of COURSE.
Both of you have the ability and determination to get way below the surface on anything you persue and then open up the subject as it connecs to all manner of things related.
I would love to play fly-on-the-ceiling as you, Victor Hansen, and Donald Trump spend some extended time around he same table and.. talk…. for a long while.
A former wife took one of those ladies self-defense courses. The major problem is how seriously the students take it and how much work they put into it. She complained about how many of her class were just going through the motions. All modes of self-defense involve some skill level and physical effort. Empty hand more than most. Not everyone is willing to put in the work.
Mas has noted elsewhere that studies show women have about half the upper body strength and 2/3 the lower body strength of a man of similar size. There’s often also a psychological barrier to work through. I once had a training partner who came up to my shoulder and likely weighed half of what I did. She turned a simple defensive action into an interpretive dance routine because she was afraid of hurting me. Once I realized what she was up to, we did the thing as intended and she could be most effective. But left to herself, she wouldn’t have known that.
Empty hand techniques have both positives and negatives. The positive is that, once one has those skills, they are always available to call upon. A skilled fighter is never disarmed.
The downsides are that it takes dedicated time, effort, and work to develop and maintain those skills. Plus, one needs to be young and healthy enough to deploy them effectively.
Age and time gradually degrade the ability to deploy empty-hand techniques. I (officially) turn into a “Senior Citizen” this year and I can say, without doubt, that my ability to use hand-to-hand combat techniques has been degraded by age, and the usual “wear and tear” of time. Plus, to be honest, I never invested the time and effort to really develop those skills in the first place.
That is the beauty of firearms. A minimum skill with firearms can be maintained long have the age of being proficient with hand-to-hand skills has passed.
So, while I approve of hand-to-hand classes for women who are still young and tough enough to use them, I do think that (ultimately) women, the elderly, and anyone with a physical handicap, are all better served by firearms, matched with appropriate firearm’s training, in the long run.
Quote of the Day :
“Fear no man, whatever his size; Just call on me, I’ll equalize.” – Old West Motto (commonly engraved on a Colt Single-Action Army Revolver)
One situation where I would think resistance would be futile would be fighting against the United States military. However, if the military is poorly led, then they can be successfully resisted. Here are some examples;
Battle of the Wabash 1791
Battle of the Little Bighorn 1876
North Viet Nam 1955-1975 according to Wikipedia (I would date the fighting 1964-1973)
Iraq (Iran proxy) 2003-2011
Afghanistan 2001-2021
IMHO Reference Vietnam:
I was there, and I agree we didn’t have the best leadership at the top. There were too many managers and not enough generals.
However, when we left, the South Vietnamese Army was in pretty good shape, the Viet Cong had all but been eliminated, and after the Tiet Offensive the North Vietnamese Army was huddled in North Vietnam.
The war was lost not because of military leadership, but because of opposition at home. After the Paris Accords we pulled out, and when North Vietnam reinvaded we failed to support our former allies.
In a standup fight, almost any military is invincible, except against a better military, or if the military dissolves due to social rot. Organization and logistics wins every time. The answer is don’t have a standup fight. Most successful guerilla movements have some sort of sanctuary, either political or geographic. Many have substantial outside support. However, most+many/= All.
Robert Gates book “Duty” paints a damning picture of our modern military. The troops in the field are fighting at least 2 enemies: that on the ground and the inertia in the Pentagon and military bureaucracy.
While there’s a place in any organization for managers-like in logistics-there’s a depressing tendency to label that ‘leadership’. Leaders are entirely different and sometimes don’t do well “playing with others” in organizations. At least until things get really scary. That’s generally because until crisis forces a change, the “organization types” are self replicating. And, despite reaching their level of incompetence (Peter Principle), rarely get fired.
I wish the new SoD luck in reforming the acquisition and budget processes. And in seeing if we really need all those 07s-11s.