Steven Pressfield’s latest project—in which he declares Afghanistan today as identical to the ancient Persia which killed Alexander, so therefore we should ignore radical Islamism and focus on “tribalism” (yes, that is his thesis)—has been extensively criticized in this space (see here, here, and here) for its laziness, ahistoricity, racism, and the generally contemptuous attitude he displays toward the rather substantial body of work into identity, religion, tribe, politics, war, and history in Afghanistan. In fact, several commenters even argued I hadn’t gone far enough in criticizing Pressfield’s lazy excuse for analysis, in part because tricking young soldiers into thinking they’re dealing with an inscrutable Other driven by alien motives (a lazy lie about the place if ever there was one) will result in a lot of innocent people dying, both Afghan and American.
In the midst of all that, Mark “Zenpundit” Safranski wrote a light critique of Pressfield’s work, calling it well-intentioned but “ultimately off-target in a harmful way.” Much like my commenters said to me, I thought Safranski didn’t go far enough, but the point remains: at best he could be described as ambivalent, and certainly worried about how Pressfield’s phrasing could be interpreted.
So what does the Small Wars Journal do? The editors thank Safranski for the great tip, and heartily recommend Pressfield’s blog and advertise its awesomeness in a post… completely glossing over Safranski’s own misgivings about Pressfield, to say nothing of the substantive errors of fact and judgment in Pressfield’s own writing and glossy video segments.
Thanks a lot Small Wars Journal! I hope not too many innocent Afghans or U.S. soldiers die fighting Pressfield’s War on Tribalism!