Self-Interest: Sun-Tzu And Thucydides

Professor Mack
Comparative Government (POLS 1220.32)
13 December 2011
The Art of Self-Interest: Sun-Tzu and Thucydides “Being fond of the truth, I am an admirer of antiquity,” writes Confucius. (Kaplan, 40) The past contains lessons that apply to the future, because while time, place, individuals and creed change, people as a whole do not. The motivations are always the same. “Thus, as Aron notes, while our ideals have usually been peaceful, history has often been violent. Though this should be obvious, it bears repeating given the triumphalist tone of public discourse in the aftermath of the Cold War. Somehow the collapse of an overly centralized Soviet state…has been greeted as evidence that civil society is on the horizon across the
Hegel compares this to a body of water in motion, as opposed to that which is still. A sea with currents and froth is constantly changing, adapting and clearing out the old to make way for the new, as a nation must as it progresses. But a sedentary pool stays the same and quickly becomes full of dirt and waste, fit only for scum; that would be the fate of a nation suffering from eternal peace. A certain broil is necessary to keep things fresh. By the same token war can put down strife within a nation. A country full of squabbling factions may unite against a common enemy, providing for order within the ranks of the State. Minor rebels and dissenters recognize the value of the institutions that make up the nation when confronted by a greater foe. In this way war can be used to the advantage of a country wracked by internal struggle. Thus it is a tool for the utilization to the advantage of the state like any
He recognized that conflict could be used to stabilize and strengthen the state, but ultimately avoiding, rather than engaging, in warfare and using other kinds of power to complete objectives was the greatest victory that could be won. This would be a self-interested and yet moral way of securing national interests. Agreeing with Confucius, Sun-Tzu asserts that a true commander is never swayed by public opinion, for virtue can be the opposite of fame or popularity. (Plutarch, who considered “popularity” and “tyranny” and “same fault” insinuated that one led to the other.) Sun-Tzu’s example of a virtuous commander is one “who advances without any thought of winning personal fame and withdraws in spite of certain punishment” if it is in the interest of his army and people. (Kaplan, 42) Machiavelli, for one, disagrees. “It is necessary,” he says, “for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to make use of it or not according to necessity.” (Machiavelli, 219) Acting against virtue might not be the best course of action for an army, but if it is in the best interest of the prince then he should do it. This is where the philosophy of Sun-Tzu and many fascist thinkers diverge. Virtue is a must for Sun-Tzu, but for many others, it is optional at