A Sense of the Enemy: The High Stakes History of Reading Your Rival's Mind by Zachary Shore

A Sense of the Enemy: The High Stakes History of Reading Your Rival's Mind Reviews

• 
  Tucker

  I am not sure that anticipating someone's feelings and thoughts for the purpose of gaming them merits even a qualified use of the word "empathy," but let it be. This book is full of historical examples of higher-order mind-reading: This government thought that the other government thought that... Sadly, I don't have the mind for it. I barely know what I am thinking most days. My EQ is not high enough to evaluate these complex scenarios, but my impression of this book is that it is solidly researched and carefully argued.
• 
  James Wilson

  Very good book on an important topic. Shore at his best in discussing Hitler, Stalin, and World War II -- subjects of previous studies on his part. Also strong is his chapter on Gustav Stresemann, the enigmatic German leader in the 1920s who may or may not have been able to preserve the Weimar Republic -- but surely would have benefited from Fitbit.
• 
  naveen

  The author goes through several examples from history. From Gandhi to the Vietnam war. Certain parts can be boring because the author delve into the political administration. The good thing about this book is, it gives practical applications on hope to read your opponents.
• 
  Jeff Scott

  A Sense of the Enemy combines psychological thought, emotional intelligence, pop science, and history to explain key turning points in history. It is Zachary Shore’s intention that emotional intelligence and strategic empathy are key traits in war and politics. One could also turn this book into a business science book the way authors have done with The Art of War. Emotional Intelligence is a key feature of good leadership and Shore does demonstrate how those with strong traits succeeded and those with weak traits failed. The problem with this technique is an over attribution to mostly minor occurrences. While it is important to have strategic empathy when dealing with an opponent, it is never the full story when dealing with historic changes.
  
  Shore has several examples: Gandhi and the British Empire, the rise of German power after World War I, Stalin’s failure to predict a Nazi invasion, Roosevelt’s read of Hitler, and the Vietnamese view of the United States during the war. Shore is looking for pattern breaks in the opponent’s behavior. These are events in which the “enemy” breaks from an established pattern of behavior. It is in these decisions true intentions can be determined. Gandhi realizing that the British did not support the massacre at Amritsar allowed him to exploit the atrocity to unite India against the British. German diplomats are secretly building weapons with the Soviets in violation of the World War I Treaty of Versailles. Will the Germans cave to Soviet threats to expose their actions or will the Germans discover that the Soviets and even Britain and France have more to lose in that declaration than Germany? The realization that they could do nothing to stop them is a critical point in the rise of German power pre-World War II. Stalin’s failure to read Hitler and his intention to invade the Soviet Union cost millions of lives. His failure to understand his opponent via strategic empathy is to blame. The Vietnamese understood that a protracted war with the United States would result in their withdrawal from the conflict. The key break was the reaction to the Gulf of Tonkin incident. The Americans wanted war, but not all out war. This key distinction solidified a strategy for the Vietnamese to expel the American forces.
  
  The general problem I have with the book is that while Emotional Intelligence and Strategic Empathy are critical traits for success, the author needs to decide which way he is going with the work. If it is just a historical exercise, the aspect of Strategic Empathy is such a small one that one would be foolish to attribute a turning point in history to it. A massacre would certainly turn the tide against those committing the atrocity. The weak state of Europe after World War I and German humiliation thereafter is enough to set the stage for another World War. The Vietnamese had been fighting for decades to kick out invaders and that determination hardens over time. This work is not a psychological work either via Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow even though he does reference the work several times. The book is not a business book to help those deal with business rivals either. It’s disappointing in this way as I enjoyed the historical aspects and conclusions, but they were too insignificant to suggest a major cause of action.
• 
  Margaret Sankey

  Examination of political and military attempts to read enemy intentions--with an emphasis on the inter-war period and the Cold War, with the ultimate lesson that effective leaders can filter out their own prejudices and see enemy goals, but should not be dazzled by sure-fire explanations.
• 
  Theodore Kinni

  Very interesting inquiry into how to use "pattern breaks" to develop your "strategic empathy," that is, to better understand and predict how an opponent in war, politics, or business will act or react.
• 
  Velvetink

  tuebl
• 
  Michael Heath-Caldwell

  The issue of the book is judging what various world leaders / dictators / tin pot tyrants will do when it comes to the crunch. Delves into some historical figures, some rather vague, who have been very influential in their geographic area, and investigates their succesful strategies.