In this third installment of the series, we will examine Chapter Three of Sun-Tzu’s “The Art of War” as it might apply to the Occupy Wall Street / 99% movement. The first installment, covering Chapter 1, is here. The second installment, Chapter Two, is here. The translation is from Sonshi.com, and reprinted with permission. The entire book, along with an excellent resource library, forums, and commentary, is available there.
SUN-TZU: THE PRINCIPLES OF WARFARE
"THE ART OF WAR"
Chapter Three: Planning Attacks
Sun Tzu said:
Generally in warfare, keeping a nation intact is best, destroying a nation second best;
keeping an army intact is best, destroying an army second best;
keeping a battalion intact is best, destroying a battalion second best;
keeping a company intact is best, destroying a company second best;
keeping a squad intact is best, destroying a squad second best.
Therefore, to gain a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence;
to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is the highest of excellence.
Therefore, the best warfare strategy is to attack the enemy's plans, next is to attack alliances, next is to attack the army, and the worst is to attack a walled city.
Laying siege to a city is only done when other options are not available.
To build large protective shields, armored wagons, and make ready the necessary arms and equipment will require at least three months.
To build earthen mounds against the walls will require another three months.
If the general cannot control his temper and sends troops to swarm the walls, one third of them will be killed, and the city will still not be taken.
This is the kind of calamity when laying siege to a walled city.
Therefore, one who is skilled in warfare principles subdues the enemy without doing battle, takes the enemy's walled city without attacking, and overthrows the enemy quickly, without protracted warfare.
His aim must be to take All-Under-Heaven intact.
Therefore, weapons will not be blunted, and gains will be intact.
These are the principles of planning attacks.
Generally in warfare:
If ten times the enemy's strength, surround them;
if five times, attack them;
if double, divide them;
if equal, be able to fight them;
if fewer, be able to evade them;
if weaker, be able to avoid them.
Therefore, a smaller army that is inflexible will be captured by a larger one.
A general is the safeguard of the nation.
When this support is in place, the nation will certainly be strong.
When this support is not in place, the nation will certainly not be strong.
There are three ways the ruler can bring difficulty to the army:
To order an advance when not realizing the army is in no position to advance, or to order a withdrawal when not realizing the army is in no position to withdraw.
This is called entangling the army.
By not knowing the army's matters, and administering the army the same as administering civil matters, the officers and troops will be confused.
By not knowing the army's calculations, and taking command of the army, the officers and troops will be hesitant.
When the army is confused and hesitant, the neighboring rulers will take advantage.
This is called a confused and hesitant army leading another to victory.
Therefore, there are five factors of knowing who will win:
One who knows when he can fight, and when he cannot fight, will be victorious;
one who knows how to use both large and small forces will be victorious;
one who knows how to unite upper and lower ranks in purpose will be victorious;
one who is prepared and waits for the unprepared will be victorious;
one whose general is able and is not interfered by the ruler will be victorious.
These five factors are the way to know who will win.
Therefore I say:
One who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be in danger in a hundred battles.
One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will sometimes win, sometimes lose.
One who does not know the enemy and does not know himself will be in danger in every battle.
Chapter 2 starts with:
Generally in warfare, keeping a nation intact is best, destroying a nation second best;
He repeats the statement for an army, battalion, company, and squad. Sun-Tzu thinks it’s best to keep things intact. As it applies to OWS, I have sensed that there are some who see this as a full-fledged revolution, that the system as it exists is too corrupt and too controlled by moneyed interests to ever be responsive to the people. I have heard Ministry of Truth state that the Democrats are as corrupt as Republicans, although, given time, he usually qualifies that to mostly the Blue Dog Democrats. I will not argue that elected Democrats, particularly Blue Dogs, are not corrupted by the money in politics. And I certainly won’t argue that elected Republicans seem to be corrupt, bought and paid for, and certainly the lackeys of the monied interests.
But I will argue this:
Elected Democrats are still Democrats, and owe a loyalty to the platform of the party.
Elected office holders have an overriding interest in being re-elected, and some apparently feel that the only way to compete for votes is to buy them.
Since 94% of elections are won by the candidate spending the most money, they have probably been right.
The Citizens United decision has made this problem exponentially worse.
The recent victory in the Ohio anti-collective bargaining law was NOT won by the most money.
It is too late for OWS to field its own candidates in the November, 2012 elections.
Given these arguments, and Sun-Tzu’s preference to keep things intact, how might OWS best apply itself to solving these problems?
Some ways would be to:
- Take an interest and offer support for various legislative referendums around the country. Not necessarily things like the Walker recall, but any effort such as SB2 in Ohio, or the personhood issue in Mississippi are fair targets that are in line with what I perceive as OWS’s progressive principles.
- Declare their intention to vote, and to vote on issues, not ads.
- Join the GOTV everywhere.
- Involve themselves in educating the public. Most people vote against their own interests in this country, and it’s out of ignorance - sometimes willful, but mostly because of propaganda mills like Faux News. Counteract that with education.
Involve themselves in fighting voter suppression laws that are pending or being litigated.
Voting, the ability and the right to register, vote, and have your vote counted, casting an informed vote, and voter participation should be non-partisan and non-controversial - but they aren’t. Even so, I would venture to say that a lot of Republicans would support these principles. One way to get the money out of politics is to prove that it doesn’t work on an informed, engaged public.
The preliminary list of demands in Michael Moore’s diary will largely require legislative solutions. Short of revolution, they will be solved by Congress (or not). Attacking and/or occupying Republican or right wing legeslative offices may be fun and satisfying, but ultimately, it will be non-productive. At least in 2012, they seem to be entrenched around the Norquist pledge. However, attacking/targeting/occupying Blue Dog offices and legislators offers the following advantages:
Publicity.
OWS got the most attention when it mic-checked Dems, especially Obama - they even got favorable press on Fox.
The force of authority.
There is this document, called the Democratic Party platform, which contains the bulk of Michael Moore’s demands, and it has already been agreed to - by DEMOCRATS!
In addition, you have the force of moral right. OWS stands on the right side of civil and human rights, workers rights, Christian principles, and the law (with the exception of some zoning laws and ordinances that you run afoul of, occasionally).
Coercive force.
As a voting bloc, you carry the threat of awarding or denying the votes that office holders seek. Democrats can legally be extorted into supporting your positions - this is what PACs and lobbyists do, and OWS has more power than they do - if they choose to use it.
It’s unexpected.
Going after Blue Dogs will isolate them from both the left and the right. The Republicans won’t interfere, because, well, they’re Dems. Mainstream Dems need to be warned that they will be next, and they would serve themselves well to re-read the platform, and adhere to it. They won’t support the blue Dogs, either. This gives you a small, isolated target to pressure. Of course, they may ignore you, but it doesn’t really matter. They still wouldn’t be able to push legislation through, but it’s a great framing issue going into the elections, and will certainly make a difference in them.
Since OWS won’t be fielding its own candidates, the one non-revolutionary hope we have is to regain control of the House and Senate - and by control, I mean filibuster proof control. Give Dems two years to show us something, with the threat that if they don’t fulfill their own progressive agenda, OWS will take a different approach, starting in the primary season of 2014. Being primaried has worked quite well for the teabaggers, if not for the country. It should be a very effective threat.
I have proposed going after the Blue Dog Dems as one example of many possible, for the following reasons. It fits with Sun-Tzu’s principles - attack where they least expect it, and attack where they are most vulnerable. It utilizes OWS’s greatest strengths - that is numbers. It is something that could garner support from a wide range of the citizenry, and it has the force of being right. I hope that we can come up with a lot more examples.
Therefore, to gain a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence;
to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is the highest of excellence.
This has been and will be one of the greatest strengths of OWS. You have already subjugated large portions of the enemy’s army by claiming the mantle of the 99%. By at least starting with the items of action that enjoy the broadest base of support, you expand your numbers and diminish your enemies’ numbers.
Therefore, the best warfare strategy is to attack the enemy's plans, next is to attack alliances, next is to attack the army, and the worst is to attack a walled city.
What are their plans? The plan appears to be to use their money to elect more and better teabaggers to push for austerity (for the 99%), deregulation of everything, redistribute more income (upwards), to solidify and expand their electoral control, and use it to enhance their power, wealth, and position. How can you attack those plans?
You can attack their plans by thwarting them. OWS has done a very good job of that, and they are running scared - or at least they will, when you start to have real, tangible success. Using Move Your Money to cost them revenue, fighting the voting wars, co-opting the tea party, making them put more and ever less effective piles of money into fighting losing battles, and promoting regulation and higher taxes on the rich are ways to do this.
Therefore, the best warfare strategy is to attack the enemy's plans, next is to attack alliances, next is to attack the army, and the worst is to attack a walled city.
Laying siege to a city is only done when other options are not available.
As I discussed in chapter 2, occupying Wall Street is not a smart or sustainable military strategy. However, it has been very effective in getting attention, and also for focusing attention where it needs to be focused. New strategies are needed, but sustaining the Occupy efforts is kind of necessary now. A good phase two strategy could make occupations even more effective, as a diversionary tactic and as a base of operations, but until your army is truly ‘legion’, the risks are great and the rewards fairly small. If I can convince OWS of nothing else, I’d like to convince them to think BIG!
If the general cannot control his temper and sends troops to swarm the walls, one third of them will be killed, and the city will still not be taken.
This is the kind of calamity when laying siege to a walled city.
The forces of the right are arrayed agains OWS. They will stop at nothing - planting provocateurs and saboteurs, using misinformation and lies, and who knows what else to trip you up where you are most vulnerable. Your weak spot is the occupations themselves, which are naturally subject to all the problems of society. There have been the types of things that any society will experience, death, suicide, and at least enough crime to give the right a thread to hang on to. They have directed the homeless and sometimes the mentally ill into your ranks, and while welcoming them is the right thing to do, it renders you even more vulnerable. These battles are fought in the press, and they’ve had an impact.
The violence that has been perpetrated by the police has worked in your favor, but after a while, the details blur and it just becomes violence. OWS can’t let themselves be labelled violent - non-violence is your biggest asset. If people get pepper sprayed, tear-gassed, and hit enough, somebody is going to lose it, and could cost you all the good will you have gained.
Therefore, one who is skilled in warfare principles subdues the enemy without doing battle, takes the enemy's walled city without attacking, and overthrows the enemy quickly, without protracted warfare.
If you use every asset available to you wisely, you can accomplish this. If Wall Street is the enemy, as well as being the "walled city", the way to defeat them is to regulate them. They are unpopular in most of the press. If you groom your allies in the press, you can launch salvo after salvo at them, with no danger to you. If you support unions, you gain an army of at least 14.7 million dedicated, organized warriors who can operate against your enemies at no risk to you. If you support people being able to register to vote and actually casting votes, there are 5 million more warriors who will cast arrows in this battle - again, with no risk to OWS (unless the vote Republican). If you can co-opt the Democrats, that's 70 million registered voters. The goal should be - and I am writing this from the perspective of DKos, and electing more and better Democrats - to give the Dems 2 years to prove themselves, to pass as much progressive legislation as possible in those two years, even to fight the battle for constitutional amendments which will be necessary. If they don't...well, they can't be part of the 99%.
His aim must be to take All-Under-Heaven intact.
Therefore, weapons will not be blunted, and gains will be intact.
These are the principles of planning attacks.
In other words, fight the battles that you can win, defeat them with a minimum of fighting, and fight smart. When you are on the right side, you can accomplish much just by being there. Let others do the actual fighting - many groups already are fighting. And winning - with your help.
A general is the safeguard of the nation.
When this support is in place, the nation will certainly be strong.
When this support is not in place, the nation will certainly not be strong.
Since OWS is leaderless, then OWS - all of it - is the general. Committed to Athenian democracy, it can’t possibly be a quick, reactive and efficient organization. It shouldn’t try to be. I think it would be much easier to garner support for general things in the GA if you didn’t have to figure out all the details attendant to fight a battle. The nation needs you to be strong and principled, not quick and efficient.
Generally in warfare:
If ten times the enemy's strength, surround them;
if five times, attack them;
if double, divide them;
if equal, be able to fight them;
if fewer, be able to evade them;
if weaker, be able to avoid them.
In other words, pick your battles. Where you are strongest, attack first. Prioritize.
Therefore, a smaller army that is inflexible will be captured by a larger one.
A general is the safeguard of the nation.
When this support is in place, the nation will certainly be strong.
When this support is not in place, the nation will certainly not be strong.
They are small in numbers, and totally inflexible. Use that to your advantage, grow your numbers, stay flexible. You, after all, are the 99%.
There are three ways the ruler can bring difficulty to the army:
To order an advance when not realizing the army is in no position to advance, or to order a withdrawal when not realizing the army is in no position to withdraw.
This is called entangling the army.
By not knowing the army's matters, and administering the army the same as administering civil matters, the officers and troops will be confused.
By not knowing the army's calculations, and taking command of the army, the officers and troops will be hesitant.
When the army is confused and hesitant, the neighboring rulers will take advantage.
This is called a confused and hesitant army leading another to victory.
This, to me, indicates the necessity of a phase two. OWS needs to adopt a simple message or set of goals, and follow them.
Now, I know that OWS has them, and I know that they are there for everyone to see. But I am not your target audience - the people sitting at home are. Adopt the methods of the right - simple, three word messaging, like "Move Your Money", or "We are the 99%" are the most effective. “Medicare for All” is much easier to promote than “create a single payer, free and universal health care system that covers all Americans all of the time.” (#7 in Michael Moore’s list). I would also counsel that you prioritize them, don’t try to do them all at once, and start with the most universal ones first. Remember, the people are behind you on some of these - even Republicans.
Therefore, there are five factors of knowing who will win:
One who knows when he can fight, and when he cannot fight, will be victorious;
one who knows how to use both large and small forces will be victorious;
one who knows how to unite upper and lower ranks in purpose will be victorious;
one who is prepared and waits for the unprepared will be victorious;
one whose general is able and is not interfered by the ruler will be victorious.
These five factors are the way to know who will win.
That sums it up pretty nicely, doesn’t it? Pick your battles, use all your resources, within and without, involve as many as possible, be prepared, and have a clear message/goal.
Therefore I say:
One who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be in danger in a hundred battles.
One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will sometimes win, sometimes lose.
One who does not know the enemy and does not know himself will be in danger in every battle.
Know yourself, know the enemy, and you’ll win all the battles.