“The Pursuit of Power” by William H. McNeill ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ How have geography, demographics, economics, and technology converged to alter the character of warfare over the past 1,000 years? It’s a tough question, I know, but McNeill spent 20 years of research putting together this work to answer it. He explains how China’s preference for command-driven markets originated in the large public works projects they employed to tame the Yellow River. Contrast this to Europe’s laissez-faire development that resulted in more free market economics and you get compelling case studies for the effect that economic preference has on technology development. Sadly, McNeill’s global perspective stops early on and the remainder of the book focuses on the intricacies of the West’s technological march towards modern war. Despite the overly verbose explanation, McNeill’s work is impressive in its depth and draws the best geopolitical connections I’ve seen since reading Zeihan. Definitely worth the read.

“Dereliction of Duty” by H. R. McMaster ⭐️⭐️⭐️ Most people can agree that the Vietnam War was a tremendous blunder. So how could otherwise qualified and intelligent leaders drive the US into such a hapless war? McMaster was an active-duty Lt Col when he wrote this *scathing* historical narrative on the civil-military relations during the lead-up and progression of the Vietnam War. The book was so scathing, in fact, that McMaster was twice looked over for his first star due to the optic surrounding his work. In all fairness, it seems clear that McMaster wrote the book with a clear negative characterization in mind, but that shouldn’t detract from his points on how senior military and civilian leaders should interact in the best interest of the country. Ironically, McMaster found himself in a similarly awkward position when, while still an active duty 3-star general, then President Trump appointed him as his National Security Advisor… only to later fire him over Twitter. This book will make you angry, but in a good way.

“Perception and Misperception in International Politics” by Robert Jervis ⭐️⭐️ Im not gonna lie… this was a tough read. As the name implies, Jervis presents a thorough analysis of the psychology surrounding perceptions and misperceptions as it applies to the world of international politics. His theories are grounded in psychological theory and then reinforced with countless examples that are frankly too numerous to follow (or refute, for that matter). Written during the Cold War, Jervis presents two competing models for anticipating how an adversary would react to heightened security measures: deterrence and spiral theory. Without detailing either, he concludes that both could be right… you just never know 🤷🏻‍♂️ So what’s the moral of this story? I took two lessons from this: 1️⃣ implicitly state your assumptions before making a decision since they may be wrong, and 2️⃣ always designate a “devil’s advocate” or red team to challenge proposals from the adversaries point of view.

“Essence of Decision” by Graham Allison & Philip Zelikow ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ “How should citizens try to understand the actions of their government?” Considering the gravity of decision-making and the madness of modern politics, the scope of Allison’s (and in this edition, Zelikow’s) book is daunting to say the least. The authors present 3 useful models for framing decisions with the backdrop of the Cuban Missile Crisis. First, the Rational Actor Model, is easy to relate to and assumes states (like individuals) take actions that are in their best interests. The average person can see the flaws in this model though… there’s too many seemingly stupid decisions that we see our governments make. Model II offers a new way of viewing governmental departments as their own entities with momentum that doesn’t like to change… something executive leaders often find challenging when pursuing their political agendas. Lastly, Model III looks at those very political agendas and amalgamates all decision making as the resultant of each actor’s political interests. These 3 models not only help make sense of complex decision-making at the national level, but also prepare us to navigate organizational challenges at any level. It was a dense read, but my mind 🤯 exploring Models II & III… I had previously only viewed the world through the “rational actor” lens. This is a foundational text for anybody trying to understand how and why people think.

“Analogies at War” by Yuen Foong Khong ⭐️⭐️⭐️ Humans are pretty smart, but our brains still rely on abstraction to bin new ideas into pre-existing frameworks. This natural process of making analogies helps us understand the world’s complexities. They carry with them, however, a caution: our bias for using analogies that are familiar to us can cloud our decision-making. Khong dives into the Johnson administration’s decision to kickoff the Vietnam War as a case study on the analogies that subconsciously guide us. The biggest lesson learned is that as decision-makers, we must constantly check our own analogies for “fit” within the context of our current situations. This also applies to checking your own biases when hearing other analogies: do I dislike this analogy because I fail to relate to it or because it is actually inaccurate? Less a history lesson and more a framework for thinking, Khong, like Ice Cube, reminds us to “check yo’ self before you wreck yo’ self”. Boom… analogy 🧊