{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011527377521613832, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.67948717948718, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Strategic Universality in the Axial Age: The Doctrine of Prudence in Political Leadership

ABSTRACT The debate on the epistemological significance of leadership versus domestic politics or strategic culture remains fervent in modern International Relations. We suggest that there is a consensus found in classical Greek and Chinese texts about the core elements of realism and the consequentiality of political leadership on strategic choice. By engaging in a comparative study of strategic concepts emanating from pre-Qin China and Classical Greek strategic texts (which were developed independently into two closed hegemonic systems), we argue that the strategic logics of the West and East attest to the existence of a universal canon of strategy, one that places a premium on political leadership. Moreover, a shared intercultural strategic doctrine acknowledges the importance of utilitarian morality in politics, a consequentiality embedded within the structural restrictions of the interstate system and the constancy of human nature.