TR3.5

Raison d'etat

Houjun Liu 2021-09-27 Mon 12:00

1 Raison d'etat

Each state depended on the other. The well being of the state justified whatever means were employed to further it. The national interest supplanted the medieval notion of a universal morality. — KBhHIST201Kissinger

A method of "sensible government" that promises to set aside personal ideological differences for the betterment of the country as a whole.

This makes politics non-secular, which means… Nonsecular wars less violent than holy wars because CLAIM KBhHIST201Kissinger: they did not involve emotion

1.2 Exhibit B: Federick the Great

CLAIM @KBhHIST201Kissinger: Federick the Great's decision to invade Silesia was pure strategy move

  1. Conquest made Prussia a "bona-fide Great Power"
  2. Prussia joined by France, Spain, etc. in war of 1740-1748
  3. In 1756-1763, switched sides

CLAIM @KBhHIST201Kissinger: the side-switching was a pure result of calculations of benefit

1.3 Failure and Overextension

CLAIM @KBhHIST201Kissinger — too much power without morality is no good, for instance

1.3.1 Exhibit B: Still France!

  • Louis XIV, under the guidance of KBhHIST201FrenchRichelieuAndRaisonDeEtat, gone trigger happy on the expansion
  • Ultimately, this is detrimental
    • When most states starts being fully rational and not at all moral, this becomes less fun
    • If no one else is expanding, a country will keep taking advantage of others, which… does not make you a lot of friends

Under Raison d'etat, "The stronger would seek to dominate, and the weaker would resist by forming coalitions to augment their individual strengths"