What do Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Otto von Bismarck all have in common?
They knew that in order to rule effectively, one must shun ideology.
Instead, they embraced realpolitik: rule based on facts, not lofty ideals…🧵
So what is realpolitik?
Realpolitik, as it is understood today, is the approach of making political or diplomatic decisions based on the given circumstances of a matter, not on moral or ethical considerations.
It’s political pragmatism to the nth degree.
The 19th century German writer Ludwig von Rochau first coined the term. He described it as the implementation of the idea that “the law of power governs the world of states just as the law of gravity governs the physical world.”
Just as one cannot dispute the effects of gravity, one cannot deny that raw power is the root of all effective political action — not ideology or emotions.
He claimed the modern era had forgotten this difficult truth, trying to conform political decisions to Enlightenment ideals.
Though the term is only a couple centuries old, rulers have followed realpolitik for millennia.
The legendary Chinese general and author of “The Art of War,” Sun Tzu is an early precursor. He would have been unfamiliar with the term, but his work reflects realpolitik.
His philosophy centered around a basic truth: war is unavoidable. He writes:
“The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.”
His strategic advice, like the simple command to “avoid what is strong, and strike at what is weak” reveals a mindset of practicality, offering feasible solutions that nearly guarantee victory rather than bold assertions that sound nice but result in ruin.
Perhaps the most famous political philosopher of all time, Niccolo Machiavelli, also conformed to this practical mindset of realpolitik.
His work “The Prince” is basically a 16th century guidebook for teaching rulers to apply realpolitik.
One example is his often cited aphorism “it is safer to be feared than loved,” which reflects the idea that rulers should prioritize political power over the desire to be popular with their subjects.
Machiavelli underscores this point later when he says that the ends can justify the means, as long as the ends are successful…
He writes:
“In the actions of all men, and especially of princes, where there is no court to appeal to, one looks to the end. So let prince win and maintain his state: the means will always be judged honorable, and will be praised by everyone.”
This mindset is fundamental to realpolitik: leaders are justified in using any effective method to maintain power and stability.
For instance, Machiavelli posited that effective rulers should lie if it's politically expedient, forsaking ideals like loyalty and honesty, especially when opponents are likely to do the same.
The statesman that realpolitik has been most associated with is Otto Von Bismarck. Via a series of cunning political maneuvers that prioritized pragmatism over ideological conformity, Bismarck pursued the unification of Germany.
His approach was one of “iron and blood”:
“The position of Prussia in Germany will not be determined by its liberalism but by its power…Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided…but by iron and blood.”
Militarily, Bismark was willing to turn on former allies like Austria in 1866 and pressure neighbors into war like France in 1870.
He was also flexible in social policy, adopting some left-wing policies to weaken the appeal of socialist parties and ensure political stability.
So what are the takeaways?
1. Power is the currency of politics; authority trumps ideology. As Sun Tzu said, war is often impossible to avoid — so learn to fight.
2. Win first, ask forgiveness later: Machiavelli points out that if you’re successful, the means with which you achieved that success will be “judged honorable, and will be praised by everyone.”
3. Flexibility is key: Bismarck’s maneuvers show alliances can shift and concessions often need to be made in order to achieve political goals. Pragmatism means adapting to the circumstances.
Enjoy this content and want to go deeper? Join our newsletter.
If you like Greek or Roman classics, you can thank a monk.
Just as much as on any battlefield, Western civilization was safeguarded within the quiet confines of a monastery...🧵
In the 6th century, the fate of western Europe was uncertain.
Barbarians had deposed the Roman emperor; age-old institutions were left decaying; the flame of civilization almost gone…
But at a monastery in Calabria, a monk named Cassiodorus toiled to keep this flame alight.
Born into an aristocratic family, Cassiodorus’ early career was a far cry from his later vocation.
He rose through the ranks of the Roman political scene, ultimately reaching Praetorian Prefect, the highest administrative role in the empire directly under Theodoric the Great.
Despite wielding absolute power, they used their authority to maintain peace and stability throughout the Roman empire and ushered in an age of unparalleled cultural heights🧵
In order, they were:
Nerva (reign 96–98 AD)
Trajan (98–117)
Hadrian (117–138)
Antoninus Pius (138–161)
Marcus Aurelius (161–180)
Notably, they were not a bloodline. All were either adopted, or in Nerva’s case, raised to power by assassins of Domitian (the previous emperor).
Machiavelli coined the term the “good emperors,” claiming their quality as leaders was a direct result of them being adopted and not inheriting the throne via blood.
He maintained that those who were raised to power by virtue of mere blood usually ended up being poor leaders.
Rome was the preeminent engineering civilization. Its roads, bridges, and aqueducts ensured an unmatched quality of life for its citizens.
Yet its greatest engineering feat wasn’t about providing a comfortable life—the Colosseum was built for a dramatic death🧵
The Colosseum became famous for its gladiatorial contests, executions, reenactments of famous battles, and even mock sea fights.
It was a theater designed with two things in mind: death and spectacle.
Constructed between 72-80 AD under Vespasian, the Colosseum was the largest amphitheater in the Roman world. Holding a capacity of 65000 spectators, the building project required extraordinary human ingenuity.
Of course, such a massive undertaking required a lot of money…
In 1831, French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville traveled to the US to study democracy.
He saw some positives, but also noted a few flaws such as:
-tyranny of the majority
-isolated individuals
-materialism
He claimed religion was essential to prevent these dangers...🧵
Alexis de Tocqueville was a diplomat sent by the French government to learn about the prison system in America.
While abroad, he used the opportunity to investigate American society as a whole, penning his most famous work ”Democracy in America.”
Traveling during the height of the industrial revolution, he believed democracy and industrialization went hand-in-hand—American democracy was the embodiment of this unification.
De Tocqueville described America as “a democratic revolution caused by industrialization.”
We’ve all seen gargoyles before — ghoulish carvings set outside old churches.
But why pair such ugly images with sacred buildings?
Well, to protect something priceless, you need something *monstrous*.
They teach us a lesson about defending what we love…🧵
First off, what is a gargoyle?
The word gargoyle comes from the French gargouille meaning “gullet” or “throat.”
A gargoyle, then, is a decorated water spout. They were used for a utilitarian purpose: to prevent water from flowing down the sides of buildings, causing erosion.
Not all the monstrous sculptures outside of cathedrals are gargoyles, though. Many are technically grotesques since they don’t funnel any water. A grotesque is simply a fantastic stone carving that’s secured to the wall or roof of a building.