John Minford, #SunTzu 10: 5 "On enclosed terrain, if we occupy it first, we must block it and wait for the enemy. If he occupies it first and blocks it, do not go after him; if he does not block it, then go after him."
Oh, thank goodness, my commentators lent a helping hand! What is enclosed terrain? Tactically, it is a level plain enclosed by high mountain sides with a narrow entrance. Now that's something I can picture, yes? Viewing it in mind, you can then follow tactical counsel.
If you get there first, you have to both occupy the terrain with your own forces, and most especially, block off the entrance. It's got to be deadly dangerous for your enemy to attempt to enter in. Picture great wooden stakes, sharpened to a point, facing outward.
Picture you own men at the ready in battle array with your heavily armored great warriors, spearmen and swordsmen at the front and your archers behind them. Beyond formidable, you become almost impossible to attack successfully. You have the plain behind for your camp.
If you further picture water falls on the high enclosing walls, you have plentiful supply of that, and picture your sheep and cattle grazing on the plain. You will be virtually impossible to force out. You've mastered your own enclosure now. You're happy.
Flip your vision. You show up, and low and behold your enemy got there first and is deeply ensconced. Do NOT go in. Don't even attempt to break in. Leave. Build a new strategy. Don't go in. You won't win.
Last, if you get there BEFORE your enemy has blocked off the narrow entry, BEFORE his camp is set up and you discover his chaos, this can be the best opportunity you could ask for. Without the safety of his preparations, he's trapped with no retreat. Attack, attack, attack!
Let's turn to the Constitution. Most everyone has heard the term "originalist." If you're serious about it, then you definitely know that Judge Scalia was its greatest champion. Just in case you don't know, it means taking the Constitution at its written word.
The other side is labeled activist, their holy grail is a "living document." This document is not bound by its terms but by a modern judgment of the framer's intent, or perhaps essential intent, which is then applied in an activist manner. I'd like to reframe the debate further.
I consider originalism to be the beating heart of a Constitutional Republican Warrior, and activism the beating heart of a Social Justice Warrior. And make no mistake, it is absolutely a war. And it is fought on enclosed terrain. The high hills are history and law.
The narrow entrance is the process of selection of judges and justices, especially those few appointed to the Supreme Court. And the truth is, Mitch McConnell is my hero here, something I very rarely call him. For a long time, I thought he should just call the vote on Garland.
Then recently, it hit me. He didn't know the outcome of the election, and any disadvantage he forced on his Senators up for reelection, or new Republican candidates for the Senate could cost the Senate itself. Now that's realpolitik. So, he decided, no vote.
What are the ripple effects of that decision? Certainly, a President Trump is one of them. We know that more Trump voters cared about the Supreme Court, and the replacement for Scalia than almost any other issue. Another is we did indeed keep the Senate in 2016.
I, for one, have absolutely not given him his due credit, and that brings us back to the enclosed terrain of originalism vs activism. Had we lost the HRC. Or, had we lost the Senate, you could have basically put paid to originalism in American history. All done. Gone.
What McConnell achieved, virtually single handedly, was to block off the other side from completing their enclosure on the narrow entry to the court. Imagine an HRC presidency and Garland on the court. Their enclosure blocked off completely.
In every rally, Trump touts the achievement of 150+ federal, originalist judges appointed - more than any president in history - and his two originalist appointments to the High Court, so far. He - with McConnell's help - knew it was our last moment to go in after the other side.
Turn now to your own town, and its city council. Are all the districts so 100% locked up for the other side that there's no chance of turning even one to ours? Then, they've completed their enclosure and you should probably leave it alone. But, what if...
Go again, back with me, all the way to, say, 2014 or so. Who could have imagined the rise of Trump? Who could have imagined the possibility of an originalist majority on the SCOTUS? We're not there yet, but with a second term, we're almost certain to be so.
Could it be that in your own town the other side's "lock" on to the representative forms of government may not be quite so 100% locked down as we typically believe? Maybe they're on enclosed terrain but have not completed their enclosure quite so completely.
Last point for today. Can you hear the new strength in Republican Senators' voices, defending Trump relative to this sham Impeachment today, following the demise of Baghdadi? I sure do. Impeachment is absolutely enclosed terrain. And no, their enclosure is not complete.
288 verses completed, 168 to go.
To return to previous sections in our #WarForAmerica2020 and #SunTzuForMAGA series, don't forget to head over to @WarForAmerica21. You'll find the digital table of contents for this series, there. Please retweet each entry you enjoy.
To return to previous sections in our #WarForAmerica2020 and #SunTzuForMAGA series, don't forget to head over to @WarForAmerica21. You'll find the digital table of contents for this series, there. Please retweet each entry you enjoy.
