I mentioned both patience and adherence to a worthy goal as the two core principles of entrepreneurship and strategy. I also mentioned that although education is helpful in developing patience and with the attainment of a worthy goal, it is not necessary to read everything that is out there. But when brought altogether, education and the application of core principles lead to what are perhaps the two basic pillars of an effective strategy, namely, foresight and intuition. With foresight and intuition, you are sure to develop an effective strategy and thus achieve your goal.
In regards to foresight, Sun Tzu said: “He who lacks foresight and underestimates his enemy will surely be captured by him.” And in regards to intuition, Sun Tzu said: “Spies cannot be usefully employed without a certain intuitive sagacity.” Thus, when it comes to entrepreneurship, policy, and strategy on both a state level and individual level, foresight and intuition are the pillars for the eventual achievement of a goal.
In one sense, the failure of a decades-long government policy and strategy resulted from the lack of a clear goal. All countries – except for the United States – have a clear goal behind their respective foreign policies and strategies. Thus, as academics and journalists in the United States, the goal is to actually set a goal for foreign policy and strategy.
This past summer, I was at a crossroads from a personal standpoint, and I had to make a tradeoff as a writer who runs a blog with both academic and journalistic dimensions. Essentially, I had to choose between continuing my blog and thus my academic and journalistic efforts which had a clear narrative which was in a process of development. Or, I had to abandon the blog and leave my academic and journalistic endeavor half-baked in order to tow a government line that was clearly obsolete and failing as a result of being sent off by Washington to some geopolitical backwater.
In essence, I was not comfortable with towing the line and being sent to a geopolitical backwater. Having to tow the line and being sent to a geopolitical backwater was a source of anxiety and paranoia for me. I am much more interested in being near the center of power – which I am at the moment – and being part of an openness and reform process that will eventually take place. My blog has long contributed to the opening of an openness and reform process as it pertains to the whole-of-government policy that has existed for decades, and if I had abandoned my blog in the summer to tow the line in a geopolitical backwater, I would not be part of a futuristic endeavor. This is where foresight and intuition come into play as opposed to myopia because of short-term gain.
And as I mentioned in the previous blog post, coronavirus is not the cause of inflation and shortages, political dysfunction, and social turbulence as suggested by Janet Yellen and others. Rather, the coronavirus lifted the mask off a whole-of-government policy and strategy that caused inflation and shortages, political dysfunction, and social turbulence around the globe. One must not confuse cause with effect. And the debate between whether a decades-long whole-of-government policy or whether the coronavirus is the underlying cause for inflation and shortages, political dysfunction, and social turbulence on a global scale is perhaps the main reason why I was uncomfortable towing the government line in a geopolitical backwater, inter alia.