I don't know if this story is true but it's good so here you go.
According to Jack Spirko, who has worked professionally with some retired Soviet agents, the Soviet philosophy of conflict in both the military and the sports area was different from ours.
Our philosophy is to rush in and win-win-win.
The Soviets took a different approach. Rather that focusing on winning their primary emphasis was on not losing.
Stay on the field. Stay in the fight. Maintain your endurance while your adversary exhausts himself. Sooner or later his enthusiasm or exhaustion will provide you an opening. Take it, and win.
I do not know if this was true or if so how pervasive it was but the idea is sound. No matter the numbers of the extent of your successes a single mortal failure will wipe them all out. Building a foundation that is stubbornly resistant to failure will never put you ahead of the stupid lucky in any single round of competition but as time lengthens you are more likely to still be around. Only those still in the fight can take advantage of any opportunities that present themselves.
Is this always a winning strategy? The Soviets are no longer around so they didn't make it work for them in the end. Environments with few mortal risks will advantage the bold enough that the wary may be simply outcompeted before the foolish risk-takers encounter extinction.
Even if this is not always the best strategy it is an important tool in the tool chest and provides a perspective not often encountered in the West.
The good fighters of old first put themselves beyond the possibility of defeat, and then waited for an opportunity of defeating the enemy.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
Thus the good fighter is able to secure himself against defeat, but cannot make certain of defeating the enemy.
~ Sun Tzu
Comments
Post a Comment