My Own Understanding:
The reading has been begun, albeit slowly. Life tends to intervene. Professor Stoett has recommended a theoretical framework that seems quite workable - that of social constructivism. He has also recommended adding critical security studies to the reading list, with Alexander Wendt, Barry Buzan and Ken Booth at the head of the list. I also want to revisit a great deal of the classical political and war philosophy. So be it. I shall have such an eclectic library!
I have also been doing a great deal of thinking about what shapes and drives strategic culture and where it fits in the broader landscape of political, civic and social culture. It touches on so many aspects of a nation. This is almost like the chicken and the egg dilemma. Which came first? Which shapes the rest? Physicality appears to be at the root of all of them, sometimes overtly, sometimes subtly.
The direction to explore security studies is an excellent one because in many ways it is the visceral human drive for collective security that propels an evolving strategic culture. Whatever appears to threaten physical, economic and ideological security/stability/integrity will trigger a corresponding defensive/offensive posture. This becomes embedded into the strategic thinking of a society. Patterns of surplus versus scarcity, physical vulnerability, internal instability, colonizer, colonized, all are fascinating contributors to this concept. It will be of interest to balance security studies with something akin to Maslows' hierarchy of needs in a geo-political context.
It occurs to me that I may be exploring some facet of Cultural Anthropology! Fascinating.
Comparative Strategic Culture Analysis, for the purposes of my research, requires the identification of the key strategic culture elements and the development of a consistent framework or matrix to establish a formalized theoretical approach to comparison. If successful this will enable a consistent and reliable detailed examination of the elements and structure of the customs and achievements of any particular civilization or group, relative to those of another for purposes of enhanced understanding. Such a theoretical model or paradigm will ultimately have micro and macro utility that includes but is not limited to long term (military) planning.The focus in existing definitions of Comparative Strategic Culture appears to be Defence specific. I would like to take it deeper and/or broader to some fundamental understanding or means of defining the "why" of human and societal threat/opportunity perception. I would also like to establish some kind of framework that is applicable at both the micro or individual level, and the macro or nation state level. The objective, for me, is to identify the key cultural, economic, geographic and historical elements and devise a frame of reference that will help to objectively identify WHY a nation, an organization or even an individual perceives any given situation as threat or opportunity. The end result, ideally, could be the beginnings of a useful strategic analysis tool with multiple applications.
Pre-existing definitions have a few key phrases and concepts that I will include in defining my own understanding.
 | historical experience |
| patterns of thought and action - I really like this one |
| ways of coping with problems and opportunities |
| patterns of behaviour, |
| adapting to the environment |
| solving problems |
| history, |
| geography, |
| political culture |
| a framework |
| coherent and durable concepts, images, metaphors and assumptions |