While I agree in principle, I think recent events (over the last half century) may challenge the “most people” assumption.

Also from Lincoln:

“The bottom is out of the tub.”

They are taught to be reflexively “apolitical” in the second sense, but in reality literally cannot be an officer of anything and be “apolitical” in either sense at the end of the day.

The key is managing and juggling both.

For what it’s worth, I’m very much of the opinion that officers learn far too late the difference between “politics” and “partisanship,” or what we might think of as “big P” Politics (all (re)organization of power dynamics on Earth) and “little p” politics (Washington).

It truly takes somebody with your first and middle names to be so humble and true to the principles of intellectual discourse.

On the other hand, I was probably half speaking out of my hindparts on that one, as so often.

#quincytype

As aforementioned, the only ACW RTS I’ve ever played that even came close (despite major flaws) to depicting the art of mid-nineteenth century command was the Take Command series. Especially with “Follow Leader” on so everything had to be done at ground level instead of overhead.

I get that the brigades(?) are supposed to be like avatars but even then. Like, what on earth is going on?

It’s not even that. It’s just the utter formlessness of anything. It’s just swarms of dudes at ludicrously close range.

Even the screenshots make me cringe so much…

Read Daddis instead.

I had big hopes for Grand Tactician but its battle RTS framework is just as unauthentic as the rest sadly. Even if the higher level stuff is very well done.

The Take Command series remains the only tactical-level ACW game worth anything despite all its flaws. The rest are absurd.

Wahrscheinlich nicht.