For part 2 of my critique of John Boyd’s representation of Clausewitz, we’re turning our attention to friction, Schwerpunkts, mass, and the overall Clausewitzian critique of Boyd

🧵 in summary

open.substack.com/pub/deadcarl/p/the-further-misconceptions-of-john?r=1ro41m&utm_medium=ios

April 07, 2026 - 17:30 UTC

2
2
65
"Schwerpunkts"
1
0
1
Just one more CoG analysis bro
1
0
1
On friction, I found Boyd’s critique of Clausewitz already addressed by Olivia Garard @teaandtactics.bsky.social.

Boyd believed Clausewitz did not consider maximizing the enemy’s friction. Clausewitz minimized this because it was usually not possible. 2/

warontherocks.com/2023/01/reconsidering-clausewitz-on-friction/ href="/search?t=posts&q=:~:text=In%20the%20marginalia%20of%20his,weniger%E2%80%9D%20%E2%80%94%20more%20or%20less.">#:~:text=In%20the%20marginalia%20of%20his,weniger%E2%80%9D%20%E2%80%94%20more%20or%20less.
1
0
5
As Clausewitz says, in war it usually takes all our effort to achieve even mediocre results. We usually can’t spare any resources from our main effort, whether that is attacking the enemy or receiving theirs. This decisive point is what Clausewitz argues must be prioritized, not friction alone. 3/
1
0
6