PJCV 6/1 - Clausewitz as a Practical Philosopher
Philosophical Journal of Conflict and Violence
Editor-in-Chief: Andreas Wilmes
Guest Editor: Andreas Herberg-Rothe
Vol. VI (Issue 1/2022)
You can read this issue in open access
DOSSIER: Clausewitz as a Practical Philosopher
By Andreas Herberg-Rothe
Abstract: In Clausewitz’s own view his work is akin to a philosophical structure of the art of war. This philosophical structure is most visible in his elaborations concerning the relation between theory and praxis— elaborations which make his work a treatise of practical philosophy. According to him, theory has to: (1) reveal the nature or essence of war; (2) reflect the difference between theory and practice; (3) provide recommendations for military action in war; (4) educate and cultivate the mind of the political and military leaders as well as that of the army; (5) follow the footsteps of Kantian critique. Last but not least, this article also offers an account of Clausewitz’s novel position regarding the dialectical thinking of its time.
Terence M. Holmes
Abstract: By contrast with the Holy Trinity, Clausewitz’s “strange trinity” is an unstable system, whose three “dominant tendencies” compete for mastery over the realm of war. One tendency is the subordination of war to the aims of policy, but that is constantly challenged by the other two—blind hatred and the enjoyment of adventure. The political tendency is the only one that treats war as the function of a purpose beyond war, but only intermittently does that tendency predominate, meaning that war is more often than not a dysfunctional undertaking and always a highly dubious instrument of policy.
Abstract: My article focuses on Clausewitz’s actual statements regarding the political changes of his time. It highlights his understanding of the notions of ‘revolution,’ ‘reform,’ ‘monarchy,’ ‘republic’ and ‘nation state.’ Using a concrete historical analysis, I aim to show that the Prussian philosopher of war is best characterized as a supporter of reforms, monarchy and as a representative of national patriotism. In a nutshell, Clausewitz was a supporter of reform in order to prevent revolution or suppress revolutionary inclinations.
Bilgehan Emeklier, Nihal Emeklier
Abstract: Clausewitz introduced an inclusive equation between emotionality and rationality with regards to the debates on the causality and practice of war in modern strategic thought. In Clausewitz’s theory of war, war is a process of governmentality composed by three types of actors: states directing war (leaders and decision-makers), armies executing war (combatants), and people supporting war financially and morally (societies). In this trinitarian scheme, war is a continuous, mutually constitutive interactional process with emotional and rational components both between conflicting parties, and within each side. The aim of this article is to discuss how Clausewitz integrated the emotion-reason equation in his theory of war, to explain through an actor-level analysis how emotions affect, change, and transform war, and lastly to discuss the mutual constitutive relationship between wars and emotions in the contemporary global durable disorder.
Abstract: This paper traces the result of the reversal of the Clausewitzian dictum that war is the continuation of politics in post-structuralist political theorizing. I argue that much can be gained by not reversing the dictum (hence, making the reversal a mistake) and retaining the conceptual relation between politics and war Clausewitz espouses. I then show what a neo-Clausewitzian position would contribute to the debate on the relation between war or violence and politics by arguing that, in the case of Clausewitz, it is better to be a Kantian than a Nietzschean.
Abstract: Carl von Clausewitz distinguished two fundamental aspects of war — political and existential. These aspects are present in the philosophy of Carl Schmitt too. He used Clausewitz to build a theory of Man and his political nature that also aimed at understanding the German defeat in World War I. In this article, I interpret Schmitt's philosophy as an instance of a modern re-appropriation of Clausewitz's legacy. I aim to show that even though Schmitt’s philosophy might be outdated, his way of reading Clausewitz may be inspiring today. There is a need for a ‘new Schmitt’ who would be able to create a system that would integrate Clausewitz’s intuitions into a modern paradigm.
Olivia A. Garard
Abstract: Allies and alliances are deeply embedded in Clausewitz’s theory of war. Allies are a live and reactive means that may shift throughout a war. Alliances, often responsive to the balance of power, harness allies as a dynamic means. Both problematize Clausewitz’s initial, dual conception of war; they embody uncertainty and inject Politik. To account for allies and alliances entails reevaluating three fundamental Clausewitzian premises: that the defense is the stronger form of war; that the status quo has inertia; and that war has duration. Ultimately, any comprehensive view of Clausewitz’s theory of war demands the inclusion of allies and alliances.
- VARIA -
Abstract: This article brings together essays on revenge by philosophers Simone de Beauvoir and Emmanuel Levinas with the rape-revenge film genre through a detailed reading of French director Coralie Fargeat’s first feature film Revenge (2017). It also links the film’s presentation of rape and violence to the #MeToo movement and how it played out in France under the #BalanceTonPorc hashtag and suggests that the leading protagonist of Revenge Jen (Mathilda Lutz) may be considered as an example of the twenty-first century version of horror’s “Final Girl” first theorized by Carol Clover in the 1980s.
You might also like
I am most pleased to recommend Trivent publishing to anyone who is at the “publish a book” stage of life. The team is professional, outstanding, supportive, they are intelligent editors who will direct, not coddle, an author on his/her journey to publication.
I have been working with the Philosophical Journal of Conflict and Violence since its debut in 2017. It has been a pleasant experience to see how the papers take shape in the process from submission to peer review to publication. The editor-in-chief together with the Trivent team do a tremendous job and are always seeking quality above all!
I’ve participated in two conferences organized by Trivent in the last few years and both were a nice experience – went smoothly and had decent talks in good spirit. When it came to managing manuscripts, I was surprised by the professionalism by which they helped my text get published. I definitely enjoyed working with them!