Disclaimer: Nothing within this page or on this site overall is the product of Panagiotis Kondylis's thought and work unless it is a faithful translation of something Kondylis wrote. Any conclusions drawn from something not written by Panagiotis Kondylis (in the form of an accurate translation) cannot constitute the basis for any valid judgement or appreciation of Kondylis and his work. (This disclaimer also applies, mutatis mutandis, to any other authors and thinkers linked or otherwise referred to, on and within all of this website). 




Under no circumstances whatsoever are the Summary Notes to Panagiotis Kondylis's Theory of War in the PDF below to be cited as representing Kondylis's position on any matter whatsoever. These Notes are the Translator's and were written to give English readers an idea of the contents of Theorie des Krieges = Θεωρία τοῦ Πολέμου = Theory of War, and for no other purpose! 


Theory of War - Summary Notes.pdf Theory of War - Summary Notes.pdf
Size : 1099.233 Kb
Type : pdf




(Because the Notes are more extensive than what I had first planned, and because I am more fond of "social science and philosophy" than "war" (even though in some respects there isn't much of a difference!), I have covered about half of the book at this stage, and the Chapters on Marx, Engels, Lenin, and a possible Greco-Turkish war, I shall leave for the future, if and when I have the Time and Strength). 





Summary Notes to be Done sometime in the Future... (in bold red):

Prologue DONE

Prologue to the Greek Edition DONE

1) I. War and politics (with two digressions/excursus: II. ““Politicians” and “Soldiers””, and, III. “War of annihilation, total war, nuclear war”) DONE

2) IV. War, economy and society: Marx and Engels (with a digression/excursus: V. “War and the Marxist-Leninist perception of history”)

3) VI. War and revolution: Lenin (with a digression/excursus: VII. “The Soviet military dogma”)

(The Chapters below are NOT in the German edition, but only in the Greek edition:)

4) VIII. Hot war after the Cold War DONE

a) Classical theory of war and the “new military revolution”

b) The utopia of purely technological war

c) The multiformity of war and its political aetiology

5) IX. Addendum to the Greek edition: Geopolitical and strategic parameters of a Greco-Turkish war







Under no circumstances whatsoever are the Summary Notes to Panagiotis Kondylis's Theory of War in the PDF above to be cited as representing Kondylis's position on any matter whatsoever. These Notes are the Translator's and were written to give English readers an idea of the contents of Theorie des Krieges = Θεωρία τοῦ Πολέμου = Theory of War, and for no other purpose! 

Whilst P.K.'s four (3 long and 1 medium-length) books regarding New Times philosophy, the Enlightenment and the critique of metaphysics until about the mid-20th century (2), Conservatism (1) and The Decline of the bourgeois thought form and life form... and mass democracy (1), which would take me about 20-25 years to translate, should, in the translator's view, be translated before Theory of War, I might endeavour to translate Theory of War after the completion of The Political and Man, commencing in about 2022 or 2023 (provided of course I am alive, able-bodied and still have the requisite very high levels of energy, and I don't decide to translate other books or the Machiavelli Introduction first!). Theory of War is P.K.'s work which has been referred to the most by people who have contacted me over the years I've maintained this website, hence, the decision to consider translating Theory of War before other, in my view, comparatively more important books and the Introduction to Machiavelli (which I am very, very fond of, personally)[1]. In any event, every book and article by P.K. is an exercise in Perfection, absolutely unique in the history of thought, and Theory of War is no exception (Apart from the many references to Clausewitz's greatness in observing the social(-anthropological) phenomenon of war, as well as using a conceptuality of utmost scientific value etc., some of the passages by P.K. e.g. on power and violence, or politics in the objective sense v. politics in the subjective sense, (ideal-typical, conceptual) methodology, geopolitical analysis as Power politics... are Absolutely Stunning - nothing short of breathtaking in terms of analytical insight into "the human condition". Sometimes I think it would be better to be your average retarded moralist and "humanitarian" in one's own moronic comfort zone, than a true, i.e. scientific, observer of human affairs!!!). It is safe to say that when one takes the long, macro-historical view of human affairs, putting groups/ collectives and individuals in proper perspective, rather than focusing on present-day "individual rights" and "feelings" and "psychology", one indeed does see the world very differently; one sees very clearly who is wielding what forms of power and where... what interests, what people and what groups "hide" behind all the ideological bullshit and spin in the Mass Media, in Academia, etc. (as would and does happen, mutatis mutandis, in all societies without any exception whatsoever - though the contents of the "spin" and the people change... and of course that doesn't mean we shouldn't be nice, kind and polite to one another (as far as possible), nor does it mean we have to pursue a particular course of political action... but some at least, will... and circumstances, eventually, will change... and very possibly (")for the worse(") = the tragedy of human existence...).

Hitler is referred to not much more than a few times in Theory of War. He is treated just like any other politician and or military commander. Whether people understand this or not, Hitler was a human being. One could say he was a (quantitatively seen) extremely brutal human leader, just as Stalin was an extremely brutal human leader (whose Henchmen, at least up to the mid to late 1930s if not mid to late 1940s), GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY included members of a particular Group, whose elites in other countries were GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY involved in banking, financial and money matters pertaining to (the lead up to) the two world wars (which of course does not in any way, shape or form mean they were responsible for the wars - such an assertion or accusation is patently absurd - but they were as elites GROSSLY DISPROPORTIONATELY involved in certain aspects of the (lead up to the) world wars = FACTS - and there are many and varied concrete (historical) reasons for such GROSS OVER-REPRESENTATION). On the other hand, Churchill and Roosevelt (Truman), though, were not leaders whose policies and or decisions did not lead to acts of brutality or even extreme brutality. So what distinguishes a and b leaders from y and z leaders is not possessing the characteristic of brutality qua brutality, but the (quantitative) extent of engagement in brutality. But things are more complicated than that. Hitler and Stalin were "extra brutal" in specific, concrete circumstances or, to use Clausewitz's terminology, specific, concrete cases of "political communication". Those objective political circumstances are the social-historical framework in which subjective political choices were made (incl. "extra brutal" choices). Likewise, Mao oversaw the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution in specific, concrete internal and external political circumstances. What Mao wanted to achieve with the Great Leap Forward, Deng and his followers, more or less, mutatis mutandis, achieved decades later (rapid industrialisation and modernisation and technological transfer to China) in order to compete successfully within the world of nations and or states - but on a much more realistic basis. Yet Mao's Great Leap Forward still served Mao's purposes of keeping himself in power and China independent, as did the Cultural Revolution, whilst breaking up many sociological aspects (even further) of more traditional Chinese society. Now, Hitler's or Stalin's or Mao's "extra brutality" means different things to different people. I personally am vehemently opposed to both National Socialism and Communism. But that is irrelevant in terms of Science. Scientific Observation treats Hitler, Stalin, Mao,... just like any other subject/object of observation. They are described and explained dispassionately in relation to the subject matter at hand, and properly put into context without any moral or value judgements. That is what P.K. does in Theory of War, like in all of his books and articles and as regards absolutely anyone and everyone. 

The theoretical "Holy Caste/Aristocracy or Nobility" of the Science of Human Affairs: Thucydides, Machiavelli, Weber, P.K.,... Hobbes, Spinoza, Clausewitz,... (Aristotle, Montaigne, Marx, Nietzsche),... and a few, not too many, others... 

Obviously my comments in [[ ... ]] can and should be ignored, but some of them might be helpful to some readers.






[1] The more I think about it though, the more likely I'll translate other works by P.K. if I'm "around" because the notes in the PDF above are, at any rate, very detailed and comprehensive as far as notes go. In that case, my previous comment about translating Theory of War first on the page "Utopia and historical action" needs to be modified...












Make a free website with Yola